Joker 2 Cost $200 Million, Despite The Original Only Costing Around $60 Million
One of the most anticipated sequels of the year is "Joker: Folie a Deux," aka "Joker 2." It reunites director Todd Phillips with star Joaquin Phoenix, who will once again reprise his role as the Clown Prince of Crime. This follow-up is getting a major boost of star power as Lady Gaga joins the cast as Harley Quinn. But that star power — and presumably some production value — comes at a steep cost. We've learned that the sequel's budget is in the $200 million range, a shockingly steep increase given that the original "Joker" cost less than $60 million.
According to Variety, the budget for "Folie a Deux" has ballooned to "about" $200 million. That includes a whopping $20 million payday for Phoenix and a $12 million check for Gaga, who previously starred in "A Star Is Born." While the figure was not cited in this report, Phillips is also expected to be earning a huge salary for his return as both writer and director. So yes, that all accounts for a chunk of that $140 million increase, but certainly not all of it. Given that the first "Joker" made $1.07 billion at the global box office and still ranks as the highest-grossing R-rated movie of all time, it's understandable that Warner Bros. would feel confident in spending big on the sequel. That said, this is arguably too big.
Now let's be clear, the sequel doesn't necessarily need to make $1 billion to justify that price tag. That said, it now would need to make somewhere in the neighborhood of at least $600 million worldwide (if we assume that WB is wise with the marketing spend) to break even, give or take. And given what has been going on with live-action superhero films as of late in theaters, that is far from a guarantee, even when we're talking about a sequel to a movie this successful. Oh, and did I mention that the sequel is a musical? That only adds to the risk factor.
Will Joker: Folie a Deux laugh all the way to the bank?
Musicals are a hit/miss proposition. WB did great with "Wonka," as the movie recently crossed the $600 million mark worldwide. But, as this report points out, the studio also lost big on "The Color Purple," which shot out of the gate like a canon yet fizzled quickly. The film is now expected to lose $40 million. Since "Joker" was such a huge success, it's fair that the studio is allowing Phillips to take a risk with the sequel. However, in doing so, it should also be mitigating some of that risk when it comes to cost. WB clearly hasn't done that whatsoever.
This comes at a time when superhero movies are flopping left and right at the box office. DC had a dreadful year in 2023, with "Blue Beetle" ($129 million worldwide/$100 million budget), "Fury of the Gods" ($133 million worldwide/$125 million budget), and "The Flash" ($270 million worldwide/$200 million budget) all flopping badly against expectations. Even "Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom" ($433 million worldwide/$215 million budget) majorly underdelivered. And I'm not picking on DC, either. "The Marvels" ($202 million worldwide) was a gargantuan flop as well, with "Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania" also underdelivering. The only outright successful live-action comic book movie last year was "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3."
With that in mind, it's easy to see why this sequel doesn't feel like as sure of a thing as it once might have. After all, the first "Aquaman" made $1.15 billion only to see its sequel crash and burn. The same thing could happen here. I understand that a "Joker" sequel was always going to happen and, regardless of what one thinks of the first movie, it should happen from a business perspective. But this outsized budget is a case of one of modern Hollywood's worst instincts once again rearing its terrible head. These giant franchise film budgets have got to be reined in. This is a step in the wrong direction.
"Joker: Folie a Deux" is set to hit theaters on October 4, 2024.