Never understood the point of making of characters just for the films when ones from the comics will do perfectly. Why make up Grissom when there's a plethora of mob bosses from the comics to use?
I don't see why you guys argue. Those films (except for '89) weren't great.
Try watching Batman Returns... you'll see how it doesn't hold up very well.
Batman Forever was actually better than Returns in many respects.
Nicholson is the gold standard for the character. Ledger was very very good, but it wasn't the Joker to me. He was a thug/gangster in clown makeup. He was scary, and as far as the modern Joker is concerned he was great, but if you are old like me and grew up with a certain era, well... he wasn't anything like the Englehardt/Rogers Joker. He barely laughed.
But he had the best voice of any Joker.
Btw, I'm surprised DeVito doesn't have nearly as much votes as Nicholson and Pfeiffer.
Actually, Nicholson's Jack Napier was quite literally a thug/gangster turned clown. Ledger's Joker, oppositely, was a force of anarchy, so he was never anyone's thug (as Jack was Grissom's ) and rather than being a gangster (Jack took Grissom's place), he just manipulated other gangsters/thugs and killed them. So yeah, you've got that one completely and utterly backwards.
Actually, Nicholson's Jack Napier was quite literally a thug/gangster turned clown. Ledger's Joker, oppositely, was a force of anarchy,
so he was never anyone's thug
and rather than being a gangster (Jack took Grissom's place), he just manipulated other gangsters/thugs and killed them.