View Single Post
Old 03-07-2013, 05:09 PM   #475
milost
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,005
Default Re: am I the only one who DIDN'T think Nicholson nailed joker??

I didn't really like the GCPD taking their time to converge on the Joker's location either. They show up as soon as the Joker goes up to the Cathedral, but where are they before that?




I know in the scripts, cards and comic adaptations, the Joker poisoned/killed the officers and they weren't equipped to handle the Joker and his men, but it would have been nice to have a small explanation in the actual film. Unless it was left on the cutting room floor, which is a pretty great possibility. I just chalk it up as behind the scenes stuff I guess, even though I don't really like doing that. Joker never announced where he'd be, the streets were crowded, and the Joker's men were all over various buildings, so maybe they just couldn't get up to him. I'll just chalk that up as a coincidence.


All movies have that though. I mean atleast a small force of them come later right? It's not as bad as sending EVERY single cop in the city into a trap like in TDKR. THAT is bad writing. It's ashame how bumbling and unsuitable Gordon got by TDKR. But then again, the police being incompentent at showing up at the Joker's float is just as bad as having the idea of sending the two ferries out (one with citizens, and the other for prisoners) for the sole purpose of protecting them. They scanned the bridges for explosives, they didn't think of checking the oh so important ferries? Gotham's men in blue have never been to bright in any of these films. Not Burton's, not Nolan's.










Outriddled, I think you should watch The Dark Knight again. I don't know if you're being biased because of your appreciation and love for the Nicholson Joker, but I promise you, the Ledger version is just as good and just as faithful to the comics. He's certainly no Osama Bin Laden rip off or alagory. He's just as much Joker as Nicholson. Ledger Joker's plans changed on a whim, very much like the Joker of most interpretations. He's not supposed to be predictable. I mean look. At first you think he wants the mob money and a part of their cut. He's also pretty serious about killing Batman (and Dent and other civic leaders). But then look, once Batman shows up and he figures out Dent and Batman aren't the same, he's offing mob bosses, won't kill Batman and wants to make Dent a freak criminal too. What if he had killed Dent in the SWAT van? He was being the JOKER, it's that simple. Is ideal was that nothing really mattered. He wanted to be at the top of Gotham's food chain and break the whole system apart. He wasn't even against the idea of other folks coming in and joining in on the fun, he even says he wants as much. Who knows that else he had up his sleeve. Too bad we'll never find out.


And I do agree with you about the '89 Joker not being a skirt chaser. There's no way the Joker was trying to get with Vicki, he was just messing with her and wanted to disfigure her. She was a side plan, a happy accident. Again, another one of those unpredictable things. I mean, look at what he's doing when he first discovers Vicki. He's literally making a collage of victims, cutting and pasting away at his Axis lair. After Bob's reconnisance (where he learns about key players in Gotham), he snaps and adverts his attention to Vicki. Not out of love, not out of trying to “wow her”. He's psychotic, he's pursuing a beautiful woman, probably Gotham's best, but not to court her, to get info and ruin her. Even more so when he found out she was somehow involved with Batman. I mean, Jack Napier didn't even love Alicia, it was a power thing. He even says to Grissom “you set me up, over a WOMAN”, as if she's nothing more than a thing, an inanimate object. These ladies were just objects to him. Not lovers, not things. Hell, they're no meaningful to him than those works of art in the gallery. All they are to him are things that need his personal touch, which is chaos and death. Had he gotten a hold of Vicki, Vicki wouldn't have lived very long.


I mean, this guy disfigured Alicia, seemed to have ruined her mind (she doesn't even act the same anymore) and most likely killed her horribly (I highly doubt she “threw herself out of a window not by his twisted expression at the apartment and omlett speech”). Personally, I think the Joker wanted Vicki for 1. information (“what can you tell me about Batman”) and 2. to kill her in some horrible way. Not buy her flowers and go out on a date with her, that's ridiculous. He gave her, what, a dead rose? That shock alone might have killed her What about how shocked he looks when she starts kissing him to distract him from Batman. If he were looking to be with her, why would he do those things? Nah, he wanted to torment and disfigure her, then kill her. More so when he found out that she was somehow associated with the Dark Knight when she “ran off with that sideshow phoney”. She represented something beautiful and pure in Gotham and that's against his view on life.




The Joker doesn't want or need girl friends or friends. I mean, look what he did to poor Bob, his right hand man who'd take a bullet for if need be. He murders him in a quick, unpredictable gun shot to the side. He even shows signs of hating Bob's guts when he mocks Grissom by mocking Bob's “yes sir”. He treated Alicia like crap before he even became the Joker. She compliments him and he's still nasty with the "I didn't ask" line.

Bad wiring indeed. He's a vile character.


Last edited by milost; 03-07-2013 at 05:15 PM.
milost is offline   Reply With Quote