So far I have agreed with just about everything you have said. I consider myself a Batmanite, I still love Burton's films. I think were it is coming from has a lot to do with Caine's recent interview. Were he says Nicholson's Joker was more like "a crazy Uncle" while Heath's is going to be less silly and more homicidal and wacko.
Mh, I didn't read that interview but if my uncle was charring people alive and gassing an entire city - as oh-god, Ra's was doing in BB - I'd say my uncle is comparable to the Joker.
I missed the part where Jack's Joker was being silly but he wasn't any short of a maniac homicide.
Although I felt Nicholson's was dark like you, like you are trying to tell these other posters, I still think he was a bit too silly in relation to what a lot of us want. He a number of times made the kind of jokes or acted the kind of way that gets the audience laughing at or with him. Although I heavily enjoyed Jack's performance, it should only be Joker who finds what he says or does funny.
That's the vision. I can see both Ledger's and Jack's Jokers being as crazy and dangerous but the tone of the movie will make you feel like his actions are either funny or disgusting.
For example, watching Jules Winnfield and Vincent Vega's actions and killings made me laugh as crazy. That doesn't make them silly characters or any less dangerous. But Tarantino's vision for Pulp Fiction allowed you to find the fun in that. As Burton did with Jack's Joker.
Once again, there was no way to sell a superhero movie successfully in 1989 if you went straight to the darkest creepiest psychopath way. Still, Jack's Joker was far more dark and scary than what's advisable to be. But for all the disturbing actions of the Joker, the director had to balance with humour, which the Joker character allows to have without falling out of character. The numbers tell us it was the right way to go so now we can still have Batman movies that sell.
That won't take any merit away from the creepier Ledger's Joker, but please, that is not an objective way he
should be or simply "is". It has everything to do with the direction - subjective envisionment - of the movie and not merely with the character's objective actions.
All in all, I'm really looking forward to Nolan/Ledgers take but just don't want them to go overboard with the crazy homicidal maniac to the point were they don't have enough of the silly goofy side we all know and love that also makes Joker the Joker.
Exactly
