Poll: Heath Ledger as The Joker

Recommended Videos

Mr Fatherland

New member
Nov 10, 2008
1,035
0
0
He did portray the joker well*pencil trick* but I don't know why everyone still goes on about him. He died of a drug overdose, he was breaking the law.
 

chaser[phoenix]

New member
Oct 17, 2008
263
0
0
I've never been familiar with the comics particularly but in my opinion, there is no beating Ledger as the Joker in that film.

R.I.P
 

GruntOwner

New member
Feb 22, 2009
599
0
0
Parallel Streaks said:
The comic Joker beat Robin to death with a crow bar. Ledger Joker cut a guy. The comic Joker crippled Barbara Gordon, stripped her naked and tortured her, then showed picture of it to Commissioner Gordon while he was being electrocuted by violent dwarves, the Ledger Joker cut another guy.
I always thought that The Killing Joke could generally be considered a slight exception, not the rule, when it came to characters. I can certainly see where you're coming from, but Alan Moore's work tends to do everything within its power to take things to a new level of, well, something.
 

pigeon_of_doom

Vice-Captain Hammer
Feb 9, 2008
1,171
0
0
Voodoopigs said:
He did portray the joker well*pencil trick* but I don't know why everyone still goes on about him. He died of a drug overdose, he was breaking the law.
It was a prescription drugs overdose because he couldn't sleep. Although I don't see how breaking the law should detract from his achievements.
 

PayNSprayBandit

New member
Dec 27, 2008
565
0
0
rossatdi said:
The Joker like most DC characters don't really have a set existence. They have a set of general characteristics and themes, each of which are highlighted depending on the series or one-shot.

The Joker from the Dark Knight is very much like the Joker that killed Jason Todd and crippled Barbara Gordon. They toned down the clowniness to make it fit in better with the specific world they were in.
Exactly. The Joker has been portrayed a hundred times a hundred different ways and it's important to keep the things that make him the joker, but whether he's dark or light should be relative to the tone of the context. For instance, I love Mark Hamill's Joker, but this situation called more for Alan Moore's Joker. If I had any concerns about The Dark Knight's Joker it's his motivation. There shouldn't be one. Now, I've reasoned this away by saying that he didn't really believe in his "cause" (I want to show the schemers...), it's just what he was doing at the time. But the Joker isn't supposed to have a back story and that includes long term goals. Although I loved how they showed that they were on board with that by having him tell conflicting stories about himself, because even he's not supposed to know his origin. As for Ledger though, I thought he was fantastic.
 

Captain_Caveman

New member
Mar 21, 2009
792
0
0
the joker can be played so many ways. as he's written so many ways in different batman series.

for the series his char was inspired from he played him great.

Jack Nicholson is still my fav joker though.
 

beholdmycape

New member
Apr 10, 2009
252
0
0
I prefer Nicholsons turn in Batman 89.
I dont understand why Heath Ledgers performance had people blowing their loads because he was supposed to be all 'DARK AND GRITTY!' when all he did was mumble alot and lick his lips the whole time.
But then again I thought the whole film was horribly overrated and unpleasent.
I dont understand why fans of a comic book character who dresses up as a leather bat and farts around with a boy in tights shoe-horn in cod philosophical garbage about good and evil.
Nicholson just had fun with the role which I prefered.
 

GyroCaptain

New member
Jan 7, 2008
1,181
0
0
He did a good job with the role as it was cast; whether that role was entirely congruous with specific different versions of Batman from the comics is neither here nor there. Nolan's Batman films are not supposed to have any resemblance to Adam West whatsoever, and people nostalgic for those and the Burton or even Schumacher films need to STFU. It's not the same Batman, it's not the same world. At the same time as people talk about the level of grit in the films, they ignore how both ended on fairly positive notes.

I mean, the films count as a distillation of the important features of Batman realized in a fairly-realistic way, and the people who complain "you got your thriller in my comic book movie!" should really just relax. The movies are made with unimpeachable quality, but I guess hype backlash can afflict anything (and to be fair, I wouldn't just throw Ledger the Oscar until I'd seen some of the other entries).
 

beholdmycape

New member
Apr 10, 2009
252
0
0
GyroCaptain said:
both ended on fairly positive notes.
Begins ended with heavy foreshadowing of another malevolent super villain and a huge fear of 'escalation'.
TDK ended with the one of our heros, who had become disfigured and a murderer, dead and the other made to be the scapegoat via his own collusion with Gordans bullshit 'we cant tell people the truth because clearly theyll all llose hope' bullshit. What amkes him an authority on that? he's corrupt, Dent is dead and batman is the bad guy.
How are either of these 'fairly positive notes'?
 

Crushed Fate

New member
Aug 20, 2008
9
0
0
The Joker has had many different inceptions and incarnations depending on who is writing the DC story at the time. For the feel of that story Heath Ledgers Joker was spot on. For Tim Burtons Batman Jack Nicholsons Joker was just right. Even going back to the old tv series Cesar Romaro had the right 'Joker'. if you took any of those Jokers and put them in any of the other scenarios as characters they would not have worked.

As people have pointed out, the Joker has gone from ultimate badass to childish prankster and back again. He has gone from a man with no combat ability to someone than can go head to head with Batman. The Joker isn't a static character and it depends on the feel of the story. A childish, wide eyed, happy joking Joker would not have worked in The Dark Knight, it would have made Gotham feel less dangerous not more dangerous for the Joker being there.
 

GyroCaptain

New member
Jan 7, 2008
1,181
0
0
beholdmycape said:
GyroCaptain said:
both ended on fairly positive notes.
Begins ended with heavy foreshadowing of another malevolent super villain and a huge fear of 'escalation'.
TDK ended with the one of our heros, who had become disfigured and a murderer, dead and the other made to be the scapegoat via his own collusion with Gordans bullshit 'we cant tell people the truth because clearly theyll all llose hope' bullshit. What amkes him an authority on that? he's corrupt, Dent is dead and batman is the bad guy.
How are either of these 'fairly positive notes'?
What I classify as a positive note is apparently disparate. Let me explain: a positive note in terms of ideals and uplifting nature. Begins ended with his decision that the people of the city were more important than whatever personal issues he had, and TDK's ending sequence passed from refusal to compromise his ideals with the Joker to choosing to let the people have a hero; because a vigilante-as-hero undermines the law and order he wishes to uphold. Better for a man who is seen as law-abiding to be seen as the hero instead of a man who goes outside that law to work towards making it the only thing necessary. I guess I should have said "fairly positive notes (in a specific moralistic sense that nobody has to agree with)".
 

beholdmycape

New member
Apr 10, 2009
252
0
0
@ GyroCaptain:
I see what you're saying but It's not law and order it's his and Gordons contrived version of law and order he's upholding. And while I'll agree that sparing the joker is a positive Nolans batman has inconsistency's with this rule as he didn't extend the same courtesy to Ras al-ghul.
So he's making up the rules as he goes along and deceiving the public with Gordons help.
I just prefer my heroes to be, i dunno, a little more heroic I guess.
 

beholdmycape

New member
Apr 10, 2009
252
0
0
mspencer82 said:
I voted a very emphatic 'no'.


I hate saying this but I truly believe it: if Ledger hadn't died shortly after completing the role there wouldn't be nearly as many fans fawning over such a mediocre performance.
 

Audemas

New member
Aug 12, 2008
801
0
0
pigeon_of_doom said:
Voodoopigs said:
He did portray the joker well*pencil trick* but I don't know why everyone still goes on about him. He died of a drug overdose, he was breaking the law.
It was a prescription drugs overdose because he couldn't sleep. Although I don't see how breaking the law should detract from his achievements.
While I do agree that he wasn't breaking the law, he was guilty of being a complete idiot and an ass for leaving behind a wife and child. Considering the fact that on the bottle it probably said something along the line of "Take two one hour before going to sleep." and the corner found like 15 pills in his stomach. That sounds like he was either suicidal or addicted.
 

Charli

New member
Nov 23, 2008
3,445
0
0
It was the right flavor of insanity for this chain of movies. Yes. Does it match the comics I grew up with? Who bloody cares with that level of portrayal. It was too good even for fanboy/girls like me to nitpick at.

Theres been several renditions of the Joker in the Batman legacy all different in some ways from the other. As long as it does the original concpet justice, I have no problem with the tone. These movies are supposed to be a dark undershadow of the concept...