The Dark Knight Rises Roven: Joker Could Return

[regwec]

I would only argue for the Joker to come back if Nolan had planned for the Joker to be a key player in the 3rd movie's plot. If the Joker is essential to the story he wants to tell, then recast. Yes, Heath gave an absolutely stunning performance, but part of the Joker's brilliance was the writing, and I don't want Nolan to sacrifice his artistic plan because Heath died.

I sort of agree with you here; at the same time, I would be concerned to hear that the Nolan bros had a crystalised plot for the next movie all along. I think it is much more healthy for ideas to be reviewed, re-hashed and modified as time goes on. Otherwise, creative media tends to seem dated before it even appears.

 

[TheBatman072]

Using JGL would be a waste if they're just going to shroud over his face and "homage" the Joker. If you don't want to tread on Ledger's performance, then don't bother wasting the talents of someone like Levitt on what's sure to be little more than an extended cameo. Really, anyone who has a similar facial structure to Ledger could easily fill in, and on top of that they might end up CGing it over anyway, as well as dubbing him over. Like I said, no need to waste the talents of someone like Levitt if he's not going to be given the same opportunity Ledger was to make the role his own.

Going by this logic then we wouldn't have gotten Ken Watanabe, Rutger Hauer, or even to an extent Morgan Freeman.

Just because he's a great actor, and he is, doesn't mean he's above doing a cameo here and there.

 

[TheBatman072]

I sort of agree with you here; at the same time, I would be concerned to hear that the Nolan bros had a crystalised plot for the next movie all along. I think it is much more healthy for ideas to be reviewed, re-hashed and modified as time goes on. Otherwise, creative media tends to seem dated before it even appears.

I would think they had an idea of what they wanted to do as far as a trilogy, an outline maybe, and then they had the branch ideas for each movie on its own.

That way, and overall narrative stays intact, but ideas can be changed along the way.

 

[Doctor Jones]

dang, a third one. sorry. im not makein u repeat yourself, u dont hav to respond at all. if its was nolan's idea and he chose the actor he could make it work, it would just be hard but it could work. and the idea was that he was suposed to be the jokers copycat that look so much like him they believed it was him.

What? Yeah, exactly, it's hard for NOLAN. You and other people are only thinking of themselves because they want the Joker in the next one which he doesn't need to be in. Ok, now you have just lost me with that stupid idea.

 

[cin0]

They probably wouldn't explain it. Maggie Gyllenhaal looked completely different from Katie Holmes but the change in appearance between the two was never explained. I'll bet Rhodey's change from Howard to Cheadle in IM2 won't be explained either. I suppose directors just assume that audiences are savvy enough to keep up.

I really hated that they changed rachel, though. the change didnt effect the movie at all, but i still hated that the only reason they recast from katie holmes to maggie gyllenhaal was just because she looked too young. for wat they did they could've just kept katie. she was just gonna die anyway. but anyways u make a valid point. change in looks really doesnt need to be explained. i just want to hit somebody everytime i hear someone say "heath was the perfect joker, nobody could ever be as good as he was" it just sounds stupid. i really hope he gets recast and somebody else does an even better job than heath so is stupid "fans" will get off his nuts. nobody even wanted him b4 the movie came out and as soon as they saw it they were ready to jump on the bandwagon. i hav much respect for ledgar and he should rest in peace, but the joker does need to b recast. he should be in the 4 batman film if they have one not the third though. and if he is in the third it should just be a small part to show him escape.

 

[kevcampbell]

can voices in movies be changed? so if they do the joker again he sounds the same as the joker in the dark knight?

 

[TheFuture]

I can't believe that this thread is still going so strong as the arguments that were made in the first few pages are the same as the arguments being made in the more recent pages.

All the same it's been a while since I gave my two cents on this issue. Firstly, I'm not a fan of a Joker recast. What I said is self explanatory, I don't like recasts. This has nothing to do with Heath's passing. You can get away with minor recasts such as for Rachel Dawes. However to recast a pivotal role, and one that people will probably look back on as THE performance in this franchise, is a whole different kettle of fish. The tabloid media will jump on it, and they will opportunistically take any chance to sell newspapers. They will paint a Joker recast in a negative light, I am sure of that, and you can never underestimate the influence that the tabloid media has over the public. There are freaks or just simply fickle people out there who will choose not to see the film if the media whip up a big enough storm.

That being said, I don't think Nolan should sacrifice his artistic vision. If it is absolutely necessary and a pivotal plot point, then I will accept it if the role of The Joker is recasted. I just expect a very rocky road a head of us if it happens.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I sort of agree with you here; at the same time, I would be concerned to hear that the Nolan bros had a crystalised plot for the next movie all along. I think it is much more healthy for ideas to be reviewed, re-hashed and modified as time goes on. Otherwise, creative media tends to seem dated before it even appears.

That's a good point, and we know they certainly changed the plot of TDK from the rumors we heard (Joker scarring Dent, Dent being a cliffhanger for B3 ect. ect.)

However, it did seem he had a general outline, and if the Joker factored majorly into the next movie, then recast. If Nolan didn't have him being a major player, or changed the plot, there's no reason to.

Bottom line, I don't want him to sacrifice his story because he doesn't want to recast.

 

[cin0]

is everybody forgetting this is nolan and not just any other director. if he could turn ledgar into the joker dont u think he could bring on someone else just as capable of bein the joker as ledgar or maybe even better. im really hopein the fans get proved wrong.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

^I agree. The people that use the argument that Ledger can't be topped are exactly the same as the people who were saying Jack can't be topped. Look what happened.

 

[Infinity9999x]

^I agree. The people that use the argument that Ledger can't be topped are exactly the same as the people who were saying Jack can't be topped. Look what happened.

I agree.

However, I will also say, as an actor and from an acting standpoint, I certainly wouldn't relish the idea of trying. It would be a very, very hard job. You would have to be close enough to Ledger's Joker so there is a sense of continuity, but you can't be so close as to simply be a copycat, and you would have to make it your own, without being too different.

And then, from the pressure aspect, you would almost be set up to fail. You already have everyone thinking that no one can do better than Heath, so the general audience would basically be expecting you to fail, and even if you do a good job, you'll probably still have a large amount of people saying "meh, not as good as Heath."

So, from that standpoint, I would definitely feel for the guy who takes on the job.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Well yea it would take someone who is "fearless". The key word used when Nolan explained his choice of Ledger.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Well yea it would take someone who is "fearless". The key word used when Nolan explained his choice of Ledger.

Yes. That would be the important part. Someone who's not afraid of being bashed openly in the media. If it happens, I would foresee the same kind of reaction Keaton got when he was cast as Bats, but on a bigger scale. The guy would definitely be fighting an uphill battle.

 

[BestGirl]

I really hated that they changed rachel, though. the change didnt effect the movie at all, but i still hated that the only reason they recast from katie holmes to maggie gyllenhaal was just because she looked too young. for wat they did they could've just kept katie. she was just gonna die anyway. but anyways u make a valid point. change in looks really doesnt need to be explained. i just want to hit somebody everytime i hear someone say "heath was the perfect joker, nobody could ever be as good as he was" it just sounds stupid. i really hope he gets recast and somebody else does an even better job than heath so is stupid "fans" will get off his nuts. nobody even wanted him b4 the movie came out and as soon as they saw it they were ready to jump on the bandwagon. i hav much respect for ledgar and he should rest in peace, but the joker does need to b recast. he should be in the 4 batman film if they have one not the third though. and if he is in the third it should just be a small part to show him escape.

I think she was recast more because she didn't play the part that well and was considered to be the weak link of the cast. Plus the TomKat media frenzy didn't help.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I think she was recast more because she didn't play the part that well and was considered to be the weak link of the cast. Plus the TomKat media frenzy didn't help.

She was recast because she said she didn't want to come back wasn't she? At least that's what I had thought.

 

[BestGirl]

I think that was more saving face for Katie.

 

[cin0]

i thought she was fine as rachel, i didnt think there was anything they needed to change. it seemed to me rachel was played almost the same way by maggie. i really dont see the point when they killed her off in the dark knight and she wasnt even in as much of the movie as she was in batman begins.

 

[cin0]

I agree.

However, I will also say, as an actor and from an acting standpoint, I certainly wouldn't relish the idea of trying. It would be a very, very hard job. You would have to be close enough to Ledger's Joker so there is a sense of continuity, but you can't be so close as to simply be a copycat, and you would have to make it your own, without being too different.

And then, from the pressure aspect, you would almost be set up to fail. You already have everyone thinking that no one can do better than Heath, so the general audience would basically be expecting you to fail, and even if you do a good job, you'll probably still have a large amount of people saying "meh, not as good as Heath."

So, from that standpoint, I would definitely feel for the guy who takes on the job.

yea, that makes alot of since. but im sure nolan would help the actor develop his own version of the character without making it be too different from ledgar so that way, the actor looks great for bein different and showed that he was still the same character. the way i think of it is like the way they played dumbledore in the harry potter movies when they replaced the original the new guy still looked like the same person and also made the character his own. as long as nolan works with whoever it is that ends up playin the joker it could still work. it wouldnt be any different than him workin with ledgar the first time around.

 

[cin0]

What? Yeah, exactly, it's hard for NOLAN. You and other people are only thinking of themselves because they want the Joker in the next one which he doesn't need to be in. Ok, now you have just lost me with that stupid idea.

this is really startin to get on my nerves. u can call the idea stupid all u want but the idea wasnt even mine, it was from somebody else. they say that it was nolans idea for. i said the joker needs to come back but not in the next film. u need to stop trippin about it bein hard for nolan, cause ive heard plenty of times that he was gonna bring the joker back and not just that idea.

 

[UnionJack]

I don't think we will see the Joker back ... maybe Harley taking revenge!

 

[cin0]

how can harley take revenge when her and the joker havent even had a relationship. that would be another reason for them to bring the joker back.

 

[SuperIabou]

Site dedicated to creation of the New Harley Quinn...

http://www.billboard.net/ia/hahaha

 

[Timstuff]

Ehhh see I don't think Ledger tragic death should effect it.

I am a MASSIVE fan of his performance, it was immense. But still, it is a character in a movie. Ledger was an actor in a movie. That's all it is. Ledger doesn't own the Joker. And I think it's pretty silly and quite, I dunno, weird, to be like "Oh no that dis-respects Ledger if you re-cast!". Joker is Joker. He ain't some throw-a-way villain. Joker is bigger than any actor. The show must go on.

If Bale died would everyone be like "Let's not do another Batman movie, it disrespects Bale!" Errrrr...no.

It is actually quite disturbing the way some people worship Ledger. They think they were friends with him and knew him and all that. It's quite sick if I think about it. Like those muppets that set up that petition trying to boycott Joker from future movies.

I'll be the first to say he turned in a barn storming performance. But to change the ideas of the next film, to dismiss Joker SIMPLY because of Ledgers death is quite pathetic IMO.

I don't think anyone here is advocating that the Joker character be hung up permanently (although there are some fringe loonies in some parts of the internet who believe so). I DO think it is too soon after Ledger's death to be re-casting the Joker, though. This Batman trilogy already has what is sure to be hailed as the ultimate Joker of a generation, and for a lot of people, both fan and film maker alike, if you prominantly feature a new Joker in Batman 3, it's either going to A) take away Ledger's recognition as being this generation's joker, or B) it will be unfair for the new actor, because no-one is going to remember his Joker the way they remember Ledger.

We have an excellent Nolan Batman movie featuring Joker already, so I don't see what the point is of doing Joker again. It's true that if Ledger was alive we'd all be begging to have him back for Batman 3, but the fact of the matter is that he is dead. If they have to bring in a new actor as the villain of Batman 3, there are plenty of other characters within the Batman mythos to choose from. I don't see what's illegitimate about Ledger's death influencing whether or not people want the character to return after just one movie, nor do I see why we have to pretend that Ledgers death should have no weight whatsoever on the story they were writing.

For all we know, the Nolan bros. may write a BETTER story than he would have if it were the Joker again, so I think it's silly to suggest that the character be recast just to preserve Nolan's original vision at all costs.. I have mixed feelings about recasts already, and the fact that in this case the actor died only further cements my not wanting a recast.

 

[kevcampbell]

could they make jokers voice in the next movie the same as the joker in dark knight?

is it possible?

would they do it if it is possible?

 

[BestGirl]

^You mean hire a voice actor to sit in the shadows and pretend to be the Joker? I suppose they could do it but it sounds rather lame to me. I mean, they might as well recast if they're going to do that.