"I take orders from the Octoboss."

The People’s Joker

Do you know about THE PEOPLE’S JOKER? It’s an unauthorized, extremely D.I.Y. riff on DC Comics about a trans woman Joker/Harley Quinn combo (director/co-writer/editor Vera Drew) trying to make it as a comedian in Gotham City. I may not have ever known about it if not for it somehow premiering at the 2022 Toronto International Film Festival before receiving a firmly worded letter from Warner Brothers. After many cancelled screenings they somehow convinced the evil corporation that it was fair use/parody, the movie got a limited theatrical release and now it’s on VOD and on blu-ray and DVD from Altered Innocence. For THE PEOPLE!

I think the main reason it has lived beyond that initial grabbing of headlines is that beneath the gimmick and the many layers of goofiness it’s a very heartfelt autobiographical story about, among other things, coming of age as a trans woman. It’s dedicated “To Mom and Joel Schumacher,” and I strongly suspect that both the strained relationship with her mother (Lynn Downey) and the youthful confusion ignited by seeing Nicole Kidman in BATMAN FOREVER come from Drew’s real life.

The sincerity is key, but wouldn’t be enough without the comic book fun. Drew plays “Joker the Harlequin,” whose youthful gender dysphoria caused Dr. Jonathan Crane (Christian Calloway) of Arkham Asylum to prescribe the experimental drug Smylex, turning her a little insane. But she’s really more of a funny, self-doubting artist than a super villain. She moves from Smallville to Gotham to escape small minds and practice her craft, with colleagues including The Penguin (Nathan Faustyn), Bane (Dan Curry) and Poison Ivy (adorably crude computer animation voiced by Ruin Carroll).

Kinda like the official non-parody Harley Quinn animated series that I love, THE PEOPLE’S JOKER mixes and matches different takes on comic book characters with allusions to versions from various eras and mediums. The Penguin has the BATMAN RETURNS nose and eats raw fish but is just kind of a slobby, okay slacker dude who wears t-shirts and doesn’t shave. Superman character Perry White is seen as an animated right wing commentator on TV, voiced by Tim Heidecker (US) doing an Alex Jones impression. The name “Ra’s al Ghul” (David Liebe Hart) is used for a clown character who’s Joker the Harlequin’s idol and improv guru – it really has nothing to do with the original character, but unlike BATMAN BEGINS Drew uses the correct pronunciation.

Joker’s jerkwad boyfriend (Kane Distler) is also a Joker, called Mr. J and styled after the Jared Leto version from SUICIDE SQUAD. We later learn he was born Carrie Kelly (the female Robin from Batman: The Dark Knight Returns) but transitioned into Jason Todd (the Robin famously killed by the Joker after readers voted for him to die via 976 numbers) who was being sexually abused by Batman and became “damaged,” as the tattoo says. Personally I don’t like that Batman smearing, but I do like the movie’s mix of apparent knowledge of many different incarnations of these characters with an anarchic lack of preciousness about them.

The story involves comic book elements like hacking drones, traveling between dimensions, and feeding Batman to a venus flytrap with comedy world insider jokes about improv classes, open mics and what constitutes selling out. Somehow Lorne Michaels is a major character, voiced by Maria Bamford.

This is all possible on a micro-budget because of a well-curated chintziness, shooting everything with Video-Toaster-esque green screen backgrounds, but allowing for a wild collision of hand-made styles by over 100 crowdsourced artists. The way it swings between winkingly crappy and genuinely stylish makes for a fun ride. There’s lots of animation in different styles, some miniature models, a great puppet Mx. Mxyzptlk (Ember Knight), some scenes starring action figures, and many characters and locations animated like Playstation games. I especially love the Nicole Kidman in the BATMAN FOREVER parody. I wonder if she knows The Rock from THE MUMMY RETURNS? The collaging of all these different styles gives the movie a tone and personality far more appropriate than if it was consistent.

I appreciate the many BATMAN-1989-specific references: Bob the Goon, “let’s get nuts,” a well-done Prince knock off song called “Pity Party Man,” and in a really funny bit of audacity (REALLY FUNNY BIT OF AUDACITY SPOILER), Drew got Robert Wuhl to reprise his character Alexander Knox via what is clearly a Cameo video of him saying that he can’t legally say the things he’s being asked to say. (During the end credits we see more of the video where he offers support for the project.) I asked for Knox in THE FLASH, but only THE PEOPLE’S JOKER delivered.

Watching this I assumed Drew had to have grown up on Adult Swim shows, so it makes perfect sense to learn she was well known for editing alt-comedy favorites including On Cinema, Comedy Bang! Bang!, The Eric Andre Show and I Think You Should Leave. For me most of the jokes here work, but even when they don’t the whole chaotic narrative and visual approach gets the attitude across so well it’s hard not to smile like a gas victim and just appreciate that it somehow exists, and not just on Youtube.

Though she thankfully focuses on absurdity, Drew shows strong instincts in some why-so-serious parts too. In the childhood scenes she bleeps out any use of her name (like Beatrix Kiddo before we know her name in KILL BILL VOLUME 1), so when Mr. J dead-names her during an argument (calling her the name she doesn’t use anymore to devalue her) it’s the first time we hear it, making it a real gut punch.

Only afterwards did I read the secret origin of THE PEOPLE’S JOKER: it was initially inspired by that much-mocked interview where JOKER director Todd Phillips said he had to stop making comedies because of “woke culture.” Drew’s friend Bri LeRose said she’d only watch Philips’ JOKER if Vera Drew re-edited it, and Venmo’d her $12 to do it. From the sounds of it Drew wasn’t offended by the Phillips quote, and liked his movie, growing to appreciate it even more after taking the assignment seriously and trying to recut it to be funnier. The more she got into it the more she thought about what the Batman movies meant to her and how much the Joker character reflected her experiences, so during COVID lockdown the project evolved into a found footage personal essay, and eventually a new-footage scripted movie (co-written by LeRose). I think it’s interesting that Drew’s parody version of the Joker is more reverent of the character’s history and original medium than Phillips’ official, authorized movie. Not that it would have to be.

We have this situation now where some hugely famous characters and stories (including Batman pretty soon) are going out of copyright, opening up possibilities for how they could be used outside of their existing corporate ownership. It’s happened with Winnie the Pooh and Steamboat Willie, for example, but so far the only response I’ve seen is slasher movies that technically would’ve been covered by parody anyway. I had this wish that some interesting indie artist would want to do something sincere with Winnie the Pooh in their own style, but maybe that’s asking too much. If you’re gonna go through the trouble of making it maybe you’d rather make up your own thing.

THE PEOPLE’S JOKER was accomplished without any of the Warner Brothers Discovery Streaming and Tax Write-Off Corporation’s precious trademarked intellectual property asset portfolios escaping into the domain of the public, but it’s a good example of the type of creativity I’d like to see from people dealing in that realm. It’s more pop art than adaptation – it uses our knowledge of and attachment to these existing characters to express something entirely different from a real Batman story. If there was a version that used generic composite super heroes instead of specific DC references it would be, in my opinion, unbearable. On some level this is a story about how pop culture shapes us, comforts us, explains the world to us. It makes me so happy that someone not only thought of the idea, but went through all the trouble to do it. On days like this it almost seems like this town does not need an enema.

This entry was posted on Thursday, August 15th, 2024 at 10:23 am and is filed under Reviews, Comedy/Laffs, Comic strips/Super heroes. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

16 Responses to “The People’s Joker”

  1. No film is easy to make; your least favorite films had a bunch of people working their butts off. But my first takeaway while watching this was huge appreciation of how much vision and blood, sweat, and tears across a large community had to go into this thing. The fact that it’s coherent and frequently lands its emotional punches makes it all the more incredible! I love that this exists.

  2. Robert Wuhl did make an appearance in the CW Arrowverse Crisis on Infinite Earths:

    https://youtu.be/RcFKvz99pkg?si=vwXR_SLWxcl4hDYI

  3. I had to skip a tech death concert to see this in theaters because of its weird touring release and I honestly would have had more fun at the concert but it did give me the unique experience of watching a movie do some real baby’s first trans 101 exposition and then have the lights come up at the end to discover that there wasn’t a single person in the theater who wasn’t visibly trans. Really makes you reflect on the power of art, you know?

    My movie group saw this, Monkey Man, and I Saw the TV Glow in theaters all within a month, and, although I only ended up only liking Monkey Man, watching three trans themed movies in theaters in a month was pretty cool

  4. I very badly want to see this, and I’m so happy it exists. I think the relationship to the Batman canon and the idea of sexuality is the same, in that we need to stop being so precious and let the remixes be heard. Who cares if someone wants to have a Batman that kills people? Who cares if Bat-Mite is played by Mike Tyson*? And who gives a flying fuck if someone prefers their pronoun of choice? The Earth is so fucking big, there’s space for every man, woman, nonbinary person, and Joker, so much space. And that’s pretty wonderful, right?

    I’m interested in the politics of this movie, since I know it tackles the current comedy scene, particularly with Lorne Michaels and “SNL” as the enemy establishment. My understanding is that Michaels was originally played by the delightful Sarah Sherman, who then joined SNL, somehow requiring her to be replaced by Maria Bamford. Why? Who made this decision? What does it mean?

    Also, I get that Nicole Kidman could be someone’s sexual identity awakening in Batman Forever, but, uh, asking for a friend… what of Drew Barrymore and Debi Mazar as Sugar and Spice?

    *Mike Tyson has never played Bat-Mite. I’m just full of Great Ideas today.

  5. this might be my favorite movie of the year so far. absolute gem. made me both laugh and cry.

  6. I chuckled at the Batcave clearly being a DOOM mod.

  7. Fear of a Black Hat

    August 17th, 2024 at 7:56 am

    Come on, if you’re reviewing and promoting this kind of junk, you might as well begin reviewing Youtube videos…

  8. It’s a feature length movie that’s been shown in theaters. I’m not sure what the issue is.

  9. Well, I haven’t seen this yet, but @Black Hat, perhaps you should familiarize yourself with a changing world.

    When we were young, we chose between entertainment sources, but movies more often than not were the number one choice. For many of today’s young people, it doesn’t even rank in the top five. They’re more intrigued by what’s on YouTube or TikTok, and their feeds take up time normally reserved for a 100 minute movie.

    And because everything from a previous generation is more available to young people than it was to us, young people process older movies and shows and sources of media by jumbling them together and personalizing it. Movie studios are determined to continue chasing the same aging fanbase, they’ve given up on young adults for the most part (all these superhero movies are based on characters from sixty years ago, from an art form that peaked commercially thirty years ago). The People’s Joker made no money at the box office, but the style of storytelling present is more relevant to younger audiences than something like “The Fall Guy”.It’s more relevant than you’d think.

  10. I reviewed a yule log that played only once on Adult Swim. I reviewed the unauthorized RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK remake made by kids in their backyard. I reviewed the movie where one guy remade FIRST BLOOD on a camcorder in his apartment. When I, TONYA came out, I reviewed a ’90s TV movie about Tonya Harding that I found taped off of TV in a box of old tapes. I reviewed FOODFIGHT!. I also reviewed FEAR OF A BLACK HAT, which I saw in the theater and own on DVD, but it had a similar sized release to THE PEOPLE’S JOKER, made only slightly more money and was not as much a part of the cultural conversation. Yes, of course I would review a Youtube video if I watched it and it was this good, because I review what I think is interesting. If you read my review you know many reasons why I liked THE PEOPLE’S JOKER, but you did not give any explanation why you are so against it you have to post to criticize me for having chosen to write about it. But I got a couple hunches.

  11. I felt I personally owed Vera Drew an admission to this after I barged in on a conversation she was having with a friend about a Tsui Hark film (I was sitting close to her at a film festival).

    I appreciate very much it’s comic, visual and pretty much everything inventiveness. It’s pretty much the best recent example I can think of when it comes to making a lot out of clearly limited resources.

    I really hope this can be a recurring midnight film like The Room, seeing it with a sold out audience that was tuned into it was one of the best moviegoing experiences of my life. There were jokes I (cis hetero self) wasn’t getting that were just slaying the crowd, and it’s purity of intention well surpasses any other minor shortcomings of craft it may have.

    Also, it’s just funny, while also spinning a myriad of thematic plates while also being deeply nerdy about it’s subject matter. Heckava achievement.

  12. One thing I forgot to mention is that the blu-ray (and dvd, I assume) has a HOUSE OF 1,000 CORPSES style menu where Joker the Harlequin stands there and talks to you until you make a selection. Gotta give it extra points for that.

  13. really wonder why trolls like fear of a black hat are hanging around this site… vern has made it pretty clear he is pro-LGBTQ and for inclusion in general, so i guess its a hate-reading situation?

  14. This one does not really look like my cup of tea (not because of bigotry but just on general interest grounds), but I am glad for this person doing their thing out there, making shit happen and getting recognition and sticking it to WB, and riling up Archie Bunker types, etc.

    On the general subject of movies and trans themes and transphobia and random comments, I did howefver watch I SAW THE TV GLOW, and I thought it was kind of an interesting failure (with “interesting” being a sincere complement and “failure” being a begrudging acknowledgement that it ultimately did not quite work for me despite or perhaps because I forked over the full $24.99 premium VOD price to buy it when it first dropped and was hoping to be blown away).

    That said, I probably will watch it again eventually to see if I can acquire the taste (I paid all that $, so why not go full sunk cost effect and give the film more of my time, as well?!). Jokes aside, I found a lot of it interesting, but a lot of it also seemed kind of half-baked and perplexing, but then the reviews I read were generally so fawning, that it again felt like that SEINFELD “New Yorker” comic situation I was referencing the other week, where I’m like, what am I missing that other people are seeing, or am I actually correct that some of the more head-scratching elements of the film are headscratching because they are genuine weaknesses or bad ideas/execution that are worthy of headscratching — and not just deep coded subtexts that I lack the perspective to tease out or appreciate. For now, I’m sticking by “they are genuinely headscratching weaknesses and I refuse to be New Yorker-ed,” but I think the director shows potential at least and is out there taking swings and telling stories that others are not.

    And I would be curious for Vern’s take. Then again, it’s pretty weird and going for a Lynchian kind of vibe, which is maybe not so much Vern’s thing, so, maybe not. While on the subject, I also wanted to get Vern’s take on IN A VIOLENT NATURE (divisive, but I liked it) and LATE NIGHT WITH THE DEVIL, so, I guess I have a personal backlog of “2024 movies I would think Vern might be curious about and also have interesting thoughts about that I would like to hear.”

  15. I actually watched I SAW THE TV GLOW right after this. I felt similar to you and didn’t think writing an “I don’t get it” review would be particularly valuable. On the positive side, there are some great images and the fake ’90s genre TV show is really well done. But I couldn’t connect with it emotionally, as so many apparently did (and not just trans poeple who relate to it as intended). I think the headscratching-ness comes both from being deeply coded subtext, as you put it, and from that David Lynch influence you also mentioned. It’s not trying to be easily decipherable. For me, reading about the metaphor afterwards was much more interesting than watching a normally charismatic actor play an awkward, timid guy who is literally only interested in watching and talking about a fictional TV show. I like that as a starting point but I would’ve needed it to go into way more of a story than that, so it turns out that one’s not for me. But that’s okay, I got other stuff.

    (I will definitely watch IN A VIOLENT NATURE, maybe on the devil one.)

  16. Thank you for the comment! I take your point on the “don’t get it” review, though I do feel like there is value in hearing from people who don’t get (or who dislike) something, especially if it’s a contrarian take, and as long as it’s a reaction offered in good faith (vs. just being a contrarian for its own sake). In any event, I also watched the filmmaker’s previous film, which I also didn’t dislike, so much as I was underwhelmed and a little confused. Not confused about any one or more specific things, just more, “what are we doing here, is this really all there is going on with this one?” Still, I do not regret watching either of them.

    My thing with WATCHED THE TV GLOW was that I didn’t feel that they really earned the level of investment you are supposed to believe they have in that show. It was just basically asserted that she introduced him to it, then he watched it once, and now it is his favorite show and only hope and foundation of his entire identity and their friendship. But they didn’t really build that up in a convincing way, imo. Nor did I completely buy the two leads’ friendship, for similar reasons. The film seems to want to assert that they have cultivated this significant friendship, but they have no form of chemistry (friend or otherwise) that I could detect, and their friendship seems to rest entirely on the show, like a friendship between two five year-olds who are friends because they both like playing Taylor Swift or playing with G.I. Joes. Which is fine and maybe even accurate with respect to certain youth-time friendships of convenience or shared affinity, but then at times the film wants you to believe there is a depth and profundity to this relationship that feels completely unearned and unconvincing (I honestly questioned at points whether she was supposed to be a kind of imaginary friend / Donnie Darko / Sixth Sense hallucination type thing — though I would expect someone to have better or more interesting chemistry with their imaginary friend).

    Then, more broadly, Justice Smith seemed like a pretty vacuous blank slate of a character, and there were some narrated offscreen plot developments near the end about major life events or developments that had transpired, where I couldn’t tell whether they *actually* happened or it was an unreliable narrator type situation — I assume they actually happened, but it was odd for it not to be shown, and the events didn’t really ring true relative to other stuff.

    Anyway, I think the coded subtext defense for Justice Smith being a completely uncharismatic borderline catatonic blank slate emo is that this is the fruit of his being repressed and whatnot, but it does not ring true to me that this repression would necessarily manifest in his having no personality or inner life to speak of. In any event, we don’t get much chance to know or bond or empathize with him or his pain, because he doesn’t give us much in the way of either affect or content, nor does he do much. A character who is so behaviorally and even psychologically passive does not really grant you an “in” or take you on a journey, so, you’re left feeling oddly alienated by this inaccessible, inscrutable mope. I get that you can fill in all the blanks of that inscrutable mopeyness (or any other perceived storytelling deficicency) with “it’s this way on purpose on account of he’s trans and in denial,” but that feels too convenient and smacks of get-out-of-being-criticized-free-card. On the other hand, there were some visually interesting things, and the overall structure and some individual scenes were weird enough that I am holding out hope that I might see the hidden design in the magic eye picture if I try to lock in on it again sometime. It will be awhile.

    Thanks for letting me know how it hit you, Vern.

Leave a Reply





XHTML: You can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>