Warner Bros. Film Bosses Believe JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX Failed Because It Was Too "Revisionist" For Moviegoers

Warner Bros. Film Bosses Believe JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX Failed Because It Was Too "Revisionist" For Moviegoers

Warner Bros. Pictures bosses Pamela Abdy and Michael De Luca have revealed why they stand by Joker: Folie à Deux, arguing that it was "too revisionist" for mainstream moviegoers.

By JoshWilding - Jan 14, 2026 02:01 PM EST
Filed Under: Joker
Source: The Wrap

Joker was a record-breaking $1 billion hit in 2019. Following its release, the movie received countless award nominations, which eventually saw Joaquin Phoenix win a "Best Actor" Oscar for his role as Arthur Fleck. 

Despite him and filmmaker Todd Phillips vowing to never make a sequel, they reunited for Joker: Folie à Deux and turned to singer and actress Lady Gaga to bring "Lee Quinzel" (a.k.a. Harley Quinn) to life.

Given a massive budget by Warner Bros.—the studio seemed sure that more box office success would follow that first instalment—Phoenix and Phillips got a tad self-indulgent with a musical that, ultimately, no one wanted to see (they've freely admitted to deciding to make a musical on a whim after previously discussing bringing Joker to Broadway).

The movie's failings were evident from a dismal $206 million haul at the global box office. As for awards, the only major prizes Joker: Folie à Deux won were "Worst Screen Combo" (Phoenix and Gaga) and "Worst Remake, Rip-off or Sequel" at the Razzies.

Talking to The Wrap, Warner Bros. film heads Pamela Abdy and Michael De Luca explained why they stand by the divisive DC sequel. 

"I really liked the movie. I still do," Abdy said, prompting De Luca to add, "It was really revisionist. It may be that it was too revisionist for a global mainstream audience, but I thought that Todd and his screenwriting partner Scott [Silver] did the thing that most people making sequels don’t do, which is they decided to not repeat themselves."

"I do give them immense props for not repeating themselves, but it just turned out to not connect with the audience," the executive added.

As of now, there are no concrete plans for either The Joker or Harley Quinn in DC Studios' DCU. James Gunn's apathy for Jared Leto closes the door on the TRON: Ares star returning as the Clown Prince of Crime, while Margot Robbie appears to have moved on from Harley.

We may, however, get another Elseworlds Joker when Barry Keoghan reprises the role in Matt Reeves' The Batman Part II

Phoenix and Phillips have yet to comment on Joker: Folie à Deux's failings, but Lady Gaga has discussed the overwhelmingly negative response to the movie. "I wasn't, like, unfazed. It's funny, I'm almost nervous to share my reaction. But the truth is, when it first started happening, I started laughing. Because it was just getting so unhinged."

"When it takes a while for something to kind of dissipate, that can be a little bit more painful. Only because I put a lot of myself into it," she continued. "There was a ton of negativity around Joker."

Do you think Joker: Folie À Deux deserves a little more love following its 2024 release?

About The Author:
JoshWilding
Member Since 3/13/2009
Comic Book Reader. Film Lover. WWE and F1 Fan. Rotten Tomatoes-approved critic and ComicBookMovie.com's #1 contributor.
JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX Star Lady Gaga Talks More About The Unhinged Negative Response To The DC Sequel
Related:

JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX Star Lady Gaga Talks More About The "Unhinged" Negative Response To The DC Sequel

RUMOR: HENCHMAN Synopsis Reveals New Details About Zach Cregger's Gotham City-Based Script
Recommended For You:

RUMOR: HENCHMAN Synopsis Reveals New Details About Zach Cregger's Gotham City-Based Script

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, Comic Book Movie is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. Comic Book Movie will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that Comic Book Movie, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
emeraldtaurus
emeraldtaurus - 1/14/2026, 2:06 PM
It failed because they turned it into a musical ......duh !!!!!!!
TheJok3r
TheJok3r - 1/14/2026, 2:11 PM
It failed because it was shit.
GComix85
GComix85 - 1/14/2026, 2:11 PM
"Fevisionist". The fact that someone hit publish on this article with such a glaring typo in the title tells you all you need to know about the quality of this website.
TheLobster
TheLobster - 1/14/2026, 2:13 PM
@GComix85 - when I saw that headline, I said out loud “that’s not a real word” and laughed lol
Malatrova15
Malatrova15 - 1/14/2026, 2:14 PM
@GComix85 - Josh Is amazing AND supports ice ..if he wants to say Fevisionist i stand behind him....and innfront ...and in His rear
TheLobster
TheLobster - 1/14/2026, 2:12 PM
It failed cause the story sucked and the musical aspect wasn’t good either. Todd lost the plot entirely.
JonAwesome
JonAwesome - 1/14/2026, 5:40 PM
@TheLobster - I think the musical aspect of the movie could have worked if the movie dealt with the evolution of The Joker and didn’t just devolve Arthur Fleck into the sniveling idiot he was at the beginning of the last movie! When he stood on top of the car and wiped the joker smile with his blood across his face at the end of The Joker, that showed an acceptance and it would be exciting to see him grow from there.
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 1/14/2026, 2:15 PM
Hot take: It was shit. But even if it wasn't it was a dead duck. All the DCEU stuff was a dead duck after Joker and then Jokerverse and all the DCEU stuff was a dead duck after The Batman.

WEAPONXOXOXO
WEAPONXOXOXO - 1/14/2026, 2:15 PM
"Fevisionist"
I'm going to assume this means shit.

The movie was so full of Fevisionist.
ModernAudience
ModernAudience - 1/14/2026, 2:19 PM
Should've been a one and done but they saw dollar signs with no clear idea for a sequel.
incredibleTalk
incredibleTalk - 1/14/2026, 2:52 PM
@ModernAudience - Here's a one word idea for a sequel (Batman) Dugh!!!!!
ModernAudience
ModernAudience - 1/14/2026, 7:08 PM
@incredibleTalk - 100% Could've been a true elseworlds Batman movie.
Joker666
Joker666 - 1/14/2026, 2:21 PM
So I liked the first one as a crime/psychological drama. I did not like it as a Joker movie! I did not even give the second one a chance. I’m sorry, but The Joker works best as a Batman villain. Clues about his origins are all that’s needed! Sometimes, less is more!
MGSSnake1988
MGSSnake1988 - 1/14/2026, 2:23 PM
Maybe, James Gunn running DC as of this day iinstead of these executives who loved Joker 2 and almost hired Michael Bay to direct Man of Steel 2 is a miracle.

Turning one of fiction's iconic criminal masterminds and one of Batman's well-known foes into a mentally-ill victim of society is a mistake all the way from its conception.
grif
grif - 1/14/2026, 2:25 PM
so why did they let it get made?
harryba11zack
harryba11zack - 1/14/2026, 2:40 PM
@grif - it spat in the face of the Fans from the first film as it was designed to do so.
u see the "wrong" side of people really liked the first one, so this time around, the message was more important then making a good film. They thought it'd be ok to do so, due to the success of the first film's box office but fortunately word of mouth got out before it's release and stopped this turd from making any money.
defenderofthefaith
defenderofthefaith - 1/14/2026, 2:25 PM
That explains a lot.
Gambito
Gambito - 1/14/2026, 2:26 PM
They are 100% right they basically did a sequel that shits on not only the first movie but also on its audience; it was bold, original and a massive disaster, I liked it!!
Cryptonautaz
Cryptonautaz - 1/14/2026, 2:31 PM
When I first read that the sequel was going to be a musical I thought it was ..a joke. Sure was.
Demigods
Demigods - 1/14/2026, 2:32 PM
Yeah... Who’d would have thought the sequel to a movie that made Joker kind of pathetic in the first place (which probably wasn’t even originally supposed to be a joker movie upon first draft of this), done as a musical would end horribly?!
That’s what EVERYONE wants to see... Joker, but more pathetic than even the last one, and in musical form... Riiiiiiiiiiighhhtt.
TheVisionary25
TheVisionary25 - 1/14/2026, 2:36 PM
Honestly , I still haven’t seen the movie mainly because I didn’t even care much for the first one but I can see this being true to an extent given the details I know about it…

It’s a movie that further commits to the idea of the Arthur Fleck iteration of the Joker not being this symbol or “hero” like some in universe and in our reality thought he was which turned those people off while also further reinstating that theme for others who already didn’t view him as such so ultimately , the movie wasn’t for anyone since it denounced a certain section of fans while just stated the obvious for others.

User Comment Image
Forthas
Forthas - 1/14/2026, 2:49 PM
It is the Warner Brother's way. After ever hit film some idiot with the ability to influence films decides they need to tamper with the things that made films great. Whether it is going full slapstick and zany (Schumacher's Batman films Lester's Superman films and Gunn's Superman), Dark and nihilistic (Snyders's Batman v Superman), or in this case, injecting a musical. It fails every time!.
BlackStar25
BlackStar25 - 1/14/2026, 2:57 PM
It failed because it sucked. Simple as that.
SheepishOne
SheepishOne - 1/14/2026, 3:00 PM
I enjoyed it as a wild subversive fever dream, but I can’t blame anyone for disliking it.

I do think people here are too quick to dismiss it as not having artistic merit. It’s just not a good adaptation of the Joker as we know him. That’s the whole point though. “What if this iconic villain is just some guy we’re putting on a sick pedestal?”

It’s an interesting idea to explore, both within the movie and with the larger meta.
HistoryofMatt
HistoryofMatt - 1/14/2026, 3:03 PM
Yeah, because what everyone wanted to see was Joker get gang-r@ped by guards in the shower because the director threw an infantile temper tantrum because "the wrong people" enjoyed the first movie.

Just too revisionist. That's the ticket. It's not that you gave $200M to a director with one of the worst cases of TDS and self-loathing that "those people" liked his first movie, and he delivered a steaming pile of crap that hated the first film and the first film's audience. Couldn't be.
FinnishDude
FinnishDude - 1/14/2026, 3:14 PM
IMO Todd Phillips is a hack. You can tell that none of the themes or the commentary in Joker were something he actually cared about. He just wanted to speedrun his career from "dudebro comedy guy" to a "big boy director" by making a gritty crime movie "with something to say" and slapped a famous IP on it for easy publicity.

The sequel, in turn, was him throwing a temper tantrum over the success of that movie not giving him a carte blanche for some big original project, but just made people ask him to make more Joker.
Tufasrox
Tufasrox - 1/14/2026, 3:19 PM
Never saw it and don't ever plan to.
GeneralZod
GeneralZod - 1/14/2026, 3:19 PM
"It may be that it was too revisionist for a global mainstream audience"
User Comment Image
AgentofSH1ELD
AgentofSH1ELD - 1/14/2026, 3:26 PM
Revisionist? Nah more like it just sucked.
Mongrol
Mongrol - 1/14/2026, 3:32 PM


The first was a one-trick-pony.

DocSpock
DocSpock - 1/14/2026, 3:34 PM

So he's telling us not to believe our lying eyes?

What a pretentious d!ckhead! The movie was complete garbage from start to end.

Truoptimusprime
Truoptimusprime - 1/14/2026, 3:38 PM
I never watched it, and I thought the first one was a brilliant film!!!
JackDeth
JackDeth - 1/14/2026, 3:41 PM
I love musicals. It failed as a musical.
TheVisionary25
TheVisionary25 - 1/14/2026, 3:48 PM
@JackDeth - I appreciate them trying to do something different but the mixture of jukebox musical and legal drama always felt like oil and water.
Twinkie
Twinkie - 1/14/2026, 3:54 PM
MY CONSPIRACY THEORY MIND BELIEVES THE EXECS INTENTIONALLY LET THE FILM MAKERS RUIN THIS MOVIE.

IF IT WERE A SUCCESS THEN THEY HAVE TO MAKE A #3 OF THIS RANDOM TIMELINE THAT ISNT EVEN CONNECTED TO THE REEVES BATMAN, AND THATS ALREADY NOT EVEN CONNECTED TO GUNNS DCU.

THEY WANTED TO KILL IT SO THEY CAN REBOOT JOKER INTO THE DCU BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THERES STILL $1,000,000,000/MOVIE POSSIBLY THERE IF THEY CAN KEEP BUILDING.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.
RedSheep
RedSheep - 1/14/2026, 4:00 PM
What's the deal with making villains "copycats" or inspired by someone else? For example, the inmate in this movie, Lex Luthor Jr. in BvS, the twin brother Joker in the Gotham TV show, etc.
LibraMatter
LibraMatter - 1/14/2026, 4:41 PM
I think I’m in the .00005% of people who liked some aspects to it. I didn’t like the musical aspect, I didn’t like that Lady Gaga was pretty much just lady Gaga. Singer and all. I didn’t like the whole” maybe he’s not the actual Joker.. maybe Arthur’s someone that influenced the Joker”-part of it. I did like the look and feel of the movie, the courtroom scenes and when Arthur somewhat embraced the Joker persona. The music also felt tacked on. They could have chosen songs that were deeper into the meaning of the scenes to emphasis the tone a bit better or written original songs(if they were stuck on making a musical). Jaoquin Phoenix did a great job with what he had. I might even give it a rewatch because I certainly didn’t hate the movie.
ModHaterSLADE
ModHaterSLADE - 1/14/2026, 5:05 PM
Probably more like it was a boring and depressing, overly long musical🤷🏾‍♂️
1 2

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

View Recorder