The Dark Knight TDK vs Batman '89 Joker Comparison

[metalhead_dave]

I don't count the truck sequence because the Joker planned to be caught, and had his men waiting to take Harvey and Rachel prisoner straight afterwards. It was all planned.

And as for the party, I say Batman was just lucky Harvey was in his penthouse when Joker decided to strike. Had he been elsewhere, I wonder would Batman have failed like he did with Loeb, and the Judge? Most likely, IMO.

Well, since he failed at everything else in the movie, he really had no other choice but to salvage what little was left.

Now I'm not knocking the movie's ending, but that was the reality of the situation. "The Joker took the best of us. He won". Why? Because Batman failed to stop all the evil Joker did all thru the movie.

The only way to stop Joker from winning was to cover up Harvey's crimes.

I'm just wondering, have you ever read The Man Who Laughs?

It pretty much has the same formula as the Dark Knight when it comes to the Batman Joker relationship... where Batman is running around like a chicken with his head cut off trying to stop the Joker from killing innocent people, after he announces who is going to kill. Even Year One Batman had a very hard time stopping the Joker the first time around.

Now I'm not saying that a movie should be based SOLEY on one or a few stories of the source material, instead they should encompass the major theme's and spirits of said material. People have been criticising B89 for Gordon's role and the fact that Batman killed even though it was based on the early stories. It's still a major movie based on Batman and his world. So even if it is Batman's first time with the Joker, it shouldn't be exactly like the Man Who Laughs, or any other ONE Batman story.

But I really don't think one movie can nail the arch enemy relationship between Batman and the Joker that only comes with the history that they have with each other. Trying to show them off as equals, while making Joker a dangerous threat, while trying to show they are alike and yet so different, ALL in Batman's first encounter with the Joker and all in ONE story under three hours. I think it takes a few stories to really establish that because even the Man Who Laughs didn't really establish their connection. So with that being said... I like what Nolan attempted at least, he made the Joker a major threat that Batman had to step up to take on and left the Joker's fate open ended.

Call me by my first name again and i will have you fired from Wayne Ind. in no time mister!

Spoiler

It's okay... I got a new job.

Spoiler

Yours

 

[deathfromabove]

I don't count the truck sequence because the Joker planned to be caught, and had his men waiting to take Harvey and Rachel prisoner straight afterwards. It was all planned.

And as for the party, I say Batman was just lucky Harvey was in his penthouse when Joker decided to strike. Had he been elsewhere, I wonder would Batman have failed like he did with Loeb, and the Judge? Most likely, IMO.



I already mentioned that. And as I said, I can't even contribute the whole success there to Batman, because the people on the ferries had the real victory over Joker by proving they wouldn't sink to his level by blowing eachother up.



I'd rather watch a movie where the hero is shown to be able to match the villain, like in practically every superhero movie.

the scenerio you want is actually fairly inaccurate to the mythos. batman is often shown playing catch up with his most challenging foes. i mentioned in my last post how this is true in the many of the seminal joker stories but it is also the case in stories like the long halloween, where batman is shown helpless to stop the holiday murders until, well, the end of the story when the mystery is solved. and this occurs only after losing harvey dent soul (and face) might i add. remind you of anything?

Wrong. The difference between this movie and Begins is that Batman was shown as an equal to his enemies in Begins. He had a tough time beating them for sure, but he wasn't outsmarted by them at every turn.

The villains were shown as smart and dangerous without making Batman look inferior.

ras burned down his family mansion, fear gassed an entire island, and was blocks away from executing his master plan and the scarecrow burned him and sent him flaming and falling out a window. after which he spent days recovering. of course he defeated tham too in the end but only after adapting and learning. sounds like batman to me.

and the joker should be a bigger threat to batman. he is his arch nemesis. this is comics and mythos accurate. where is is shown otherwise?

That is not what I'm asking for. Have you been reading what I've been saying?

I want a movie where the hero is shown as competent and a match for his adversary. Not just at the end, but all the way thru. It should be an evenly matched battle of wits and intelligence. Neither adversary should come off looking weak or vastly inferior.

Take my Batman '89 example. Batman was able to show he was a match for Joker by thwarting his mass murder scheme by cracking his poison code. He didn't capture Joker, but he did throw a spanner in Joker's plans, and showed he could match Joker's intelligence. Nice bit of detective work shown on Batman's behalf, too.

I know all that. The difference is that Batman didn't rise to the challenge until the end, after he'd lost Rachel, Dent, and whole bunch of other innocents. All thru the movie he couldn't keep up with the Joker.

Fact. And it's an inaccurate despiction of the Batman/Joker relationship. Something you've been crowing about all thru this thread regarding Nicholson's Joker. Are you trying to excuse some changes? One set of rules for one, and another set for another?

Doesn't work that way, and you know it. And inaccuracy is an inaccuracy. And this was a big one.

its not a fact.

far from it.

like i have pointed out, this is not an inaccuracy or an inaccurate description of batman and joker's relationship. it is quite the opposite in fact. it is in fact very faithful esp. as portrayed in their first encounters. did batman stop the joker from murdering his first few victims that he promised to kill in the man who laughs or in his first appearence? no.

did batman prevent barbara gordon from being crippled? did he prevent jim gordon from being tortured and nearly driven to madness? did he prevent robin 2 from being beaten to death? did he save sarah essen's life or the lives of the entire studio audience of the david endocrime show including the host and his own shrink?

and did he prevent harvey dent from being mutilated and driven to madness? (granted in canon it was not the joker but point still stands, batman failed to stop it from happening.) i will assume you already know the answers.

point is batman is not perfect and he is often shown to be incapable of stoping the joker from commiting his most heinous acts.

Well, since he failed at everything else in the movie, he really had no other choice but to salvage what little was left.

Now I'm not knocking the movie's ending, but that was the reality of the situation. "The Joker took the best of us. He won". Why? Because Batman failed to stop all the evil Joker did all thru the movie.

The only way to stop Joker from winning was to cover up Harvey's crimes.

"The Joker took the best of us. He won".

you are convienently leaving out the rest though...

"the joker won. harveys' prosecution everything he fought for, undone...we bet it all on him. the joker took the best of us and tore him down. people will lose hope"

"no, they wont. they can never know what he did...the joker cannot win. gotham need its true hero..."
...
"i am whatever gotham needs me to be"

by taking the fall batman prevents the joker from "winning his battle for gotham's soul".

 

[The Joker]

I'm just wondering, have you ever read The Man Who Laughs?

Of course. One of my favourites.

But the difference is that with the murders, there's only two of them. And Batman was on site for both of them. And second, Batman still showed himself as a match for Joker, with inventing the anti toxin for Joker's toxin, putting the tracer on Joker which leads him to the survey and planning building which helps him work out Joker's gonna poison the water supply, he also deduces Joker was the Red Hood when he goes undercover as a reporter to the Ace Chemical company etc. He wasn't just running around after Joker had done the damage.

In TDK, he never even came close to stopping any of the murders. Most of them he wasn't even there for. The only target that wasn't killed was the Mayor, and that's because Gordon saved him. Bruce was being shot at by the Cops up in the apartment.

Now I'm not saying that a movie should be based SOLEY on one or a few stories of the source material, instead they should encompass the major theme's and spirits of said material. People have been criticising B89 for Gordon's role and the fact that Batman killed even though it was based on the early stories. It's still a major movie based on Batman and his world. So even if it is Batman's first time with the Joker, it shouldn't be exactly like the Man Who Laughs, or any other ONE Batman story.

I fully agree. Which is why this was not a major complaint for me. It was a minor one, and certainly didn't ruin the movie.

But even with TDK, there is no Batman story where Batman is so utterly outsmarted by Joker until the very end. Including The Man Who Laughs.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

The Joker has always been a step ahead of Batman until the end of the story. That's how he's always managed to lure him into death traps, that's how he was able to kidnap and torture Gordon, that's how he was able to kill dozens in Batman, and that's exactly how he evaded Batman and continued his killing spree in Batman #1, a considerable influence on TDK.

It's why he's Batman's ultimate nemesis. Because he probably could beat Batman, when all is said and done. But it's his hubris and his madness that usually end up slipping him up, coupled with last-minute ingenuity (or sometimes brute force) from Batman.

Batman cleaned house in BB. The whole point of TDK is that this mission is going to be a whole lot harder than he thought. And that's perfectly embodied by the Joker.

Batman isn't perfect. I HATE the interpretation of perfect Batman, the Batgod. Especially this early in his career. He is not prepared for everything. He was prepared for guys like Falcone, Crane, who just wanted money. He didn't forsee dealing with total madness.

But even later in his career, even when dealing with the Joker for years, he STILL never truly knows what to expect.

 

[deathfromabove]

The Joker has always been a step ahead of Batman until the end of the story. That's how he's always managed to lure him into death traps, that's how he was able to kidnap and torture Gordon, that's how he was able to kill dozens in Batman, and that's exactly how he evaded Batman and continued his killing spree in Batman #1, a considerable influence on TDK.

It's why he's Batman's ultimate nemesis. Because he probably could beat Batman, when all is said and done. But it's his hubris and his madness that usually end up slipping him up, coupled with last-minute ingenuity (or sometimes brute force) from Batman.

Batman cleaned house in BB. The whole point of TDK is that this mission is going to be a whole lot harder than he thought. And that's perfectly embodied by the Joker.

Batman isn't perfect. I HATE the interpretation of perfect Batman, the Batgod. Especially this early in his career. He is not prepared for everything. He was prepared for guys like Falcone, Crane, who just wanted money. He didn't forsee dealing with total madness.

But even later in his career, even when dealing with the Joker for years, he STILL never truly knows what to expect.

now were talkin...

 

[The Joker]

the scenerio you want is actually fairly inaccurate to the mythos. batman is often shown playing catch up with his most challenging foes.

Really? So name me a story where Batman was outwitted and outsmarted, and lost so much to ONE enemy in ONE story.

Please, tell me.

i mentioned in my last post how this is true in the many of the seminal joker stories but it is also the case in stories like the long halloween, where batman is shown helpless to stop the holiday murders until, well, the end of the story when the mystery is solved. and this occurs only after losing harvey dent soul (and face) might i add. remind you of anything?

The halloween murders were committed by two different people. Second, the identity was unknown, and the murders were not pre-announced. And third, the halloween killer was not the sole antagonist in the story. Unlike in TDK, where the Joker was the sole problem, and Batman couldn't keep up with him.

ras burned down his family mansion, fear gassed an entire island, and was blocks away from executing his master plan and the scarecrow burned him and sent him flaming and falling out a window. after which he spent days recovering. of course he defeated tham too in the end but only after adapting and learning. sounds like batman to me.

Yes, and Batman also destroyed Ra's' base, put Falcone behind bars, stopped the poison production at Arkham, saved Rachel, and foiled Ra's and his scheme.

See, that's what I mean. It was even stephen. The villains were shown as dangerous, but Batman was shown he could match them. Burton did the same thing. Penguin framed Batman for kidnapping and murder, sabotaged his Batmobile, but Batman exposed Penguin's villainy at his public speech, and saved the kids and stopped him from blowing up Gotham.

That's how it's done.

and the joker should be a bigger threat to batman. he is his arch nemesis. this is comics and mythos accurate. where is is shown otherwise?

Since none of you have sufficently provided an example of where the Joker has overwhelmed Batman so badly, to a point where he wanted to quit being Batman, I think the answer to that question is fairly obvious.

its not a fact. far from it. like i have pointed out, this is not an inaccuracy or an inaccurate description of batman and joker's relationship. it is quite the opposite in fact. did batman stop the joker from murdering his first few victims that he promised to kill in the man who laughs or in his first appearence? no.

Two victims. And as I said in a previous post, at least he was on site to try and stop them, and did more than just sit and wait for Joker to strike again. He created anti-toxin, figured out Joker's ultimate scheme, deduced where Joker came from etc.

did batman prevent barbara gordon from being crippled? did he prevent jim gordon from being tortured and nearly driven to madness? did he prevent robin 2 from being beaten to death? did he save sarah essen's life or the lives of the entire studio audience of the david endocrime show including the host and his own shrink?and did he prevent harvey dent from being mutilated and driven to madness? (granted in canon it was not the joker but point still stands, batman failed to stop it from happening.) i will assume you already know the answers.

Oh christ, will you stop being silly. You've just listed FIVE different stories. Had Joker accomplished all that in one tale, I'd be holding my hands up to you all ages ago.

These were five different stories, spread over different years, different scenarios etc. And none of those stories displayed Batman as being unable to keep up with Joker. Take 'A Death in the Family' where he kills Robin. Yeah, Robin dies, but he stops Joker from selling a missile, poisoning ethiopian refugees with his Joker toxin, and prevents him from killing the members of the U.N.

Are you understanding what I'm saying now?

point is batman is not perfect and he is often shown to be incapable of stoping the joker from commiting his most heinous acts.

Of course. Where have I said otherwise?

How much more simply can I spell this out? I do not, repeat do not expect Batman to be able to prevent everything the villain does. That'd make the villain pretty useless, wouldn't it? I expect Batman to be able to rise to the challenge and prove himself a worthy foe for the villain.

In TDK, Batman did not do that. Not until the end. And even then, he'd suffered way too many losses and failures at the hands of the Joker. Heck, he ended the movie a criminal himself.

by taking the fall batman prevents the joker from "winning his battle for gotham's soul".

Because he has no other choice. He failed to stop everything else Joker did. Batman lost everything. Harvey, Rachel, and his hero status in Gotham.

He was left to clean up the mess the only way he thought he could.

 

[BatmansWood]

^The way i saw it, in Hush Batman was outsmarted till the very end. And he was outsmarted in The Long Halloween.

 

[deathfromabove]

you seem to be going out of your way to be obtuse so i am only going to address one of your points...

you said "Yes, and Batman also destroyed Ra's' base, put Falcone behind bars, stopped the poison production at Arkham, saved Rachel, and foiled Ra's and his scheme."

batman saved dent from the joker at his pent house, and saved rachel from falling to her death, again saved dent from a rpg during the chase, saved reese from getting smashed, used the sonar to find the joker and save the hostages at the pruitt building (= to developing an anti toxin? ), prevented the joker from pushing the button on the detonator and blowing up the ferries, saved the gordon's, and saved gothams soul (not to mention harvey's prosecution of the mob.)

it wasnt all just failure. you arent being fair here.

 

[The Joker]

^The way i saw it, in Hush Batman was outsmarted till the very end. And he was outsmarted in The Long Halloween.

Again, as I mentioned above, The Long Halloween killer, and Hush, were not the sole antagonists in those stories. And batman did not know their identites. Both of those stories contained an abundance of Batman's major enemies.

In TDK, Joker was the the only threat.

 

[BatmansWood]

Well the movie wouldnt really be exciting if Batman beat him every single time or they were a match. Movie and stories need to have conflict and strugle for the protagonists. And since its Joker and its his first time seeing him, he needs to loose once and awhile.

 

[The Joker]

you seem to be going out of your way to be obtuse so i am only going to address one of your points...

Sorry, I don't mean to sound like that. I guess I'm getting frustrated of repeatedly addressing the same thing.

Anyway, apologies for coming across as rude.

you said "Yes, and Batman also destroyed Ra's' base, put Falcone behind bars, stopped the poison production at Arkham, saved Rachel, and foiled Ra's and his scheme."

batman saved dent from the joker at his pent house, and saved rachel from falling to her death, again saved dent from a rpg during the chase, saved reese from getting smashed, used the sonar to find the joker and save the hostages at the pruitt building (= to developing an anti toxin? ), prevented the joker from pushing the button on the detonator and blowing up the ferries, saved the gordon's, and saved gothams soul (not to mention harvey's prosecution of the mob.)

it wasnt all just failure. you arent being fair here.

Ok, I've addressed these points before, but you probably missed them in the sea of chaos in here.

- Saving Harvey in his penthouse, I equated that to luck. He was lucky Joker decided to strike at Harvey when he was in Bruce's very home. Had Harvey been elsewhere, would Batman have failed like he did with Commissoner Loeb and Judge Sorillo? Very possibly, IMO.

- The chase was all planned for Joker to be caught. Why else was there an escort waiting to take Harvey prisoner and to the rigged warehouse? It was all planned. Joker wanted to be caught. He wanted to confront Batman. He wanted to make him choose between Harvey and Rachel. Thug with a bomb in his stomach etc. Joker was two steps ahead of all of them here.

- Saving Rachel from falling to her death, yes, fair play I'll give you that one.

- The sonar and preventing the ferries blowing up was all at the end. Like I said, that was when he did finally rise to the challenge. At the end. Never disputed that.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I saw absolutely nothing wrong with Joker putting Batman on his heels for most of TDK. In fact, it's one of the reasons I enjoyed the movie so much. It just makes for great drama when your villain is as strong, or even stronger, than your hero, because you want your hero to actually have to work hard to step up and stop him, as apposed to the hero always knowing what the solution is, which just doesn't work dramatically.

 

[mrbrownie]

Sorry, I don't mean to sound like that. I guess I'm getting frustrated of repeatedly addressing the same thing.

Anyway, apologies for coming across as rude.



Ok, I've addressed these points before, but you probably missed them in the sea of chaos in here.

- Saving Harvey in his penthouse, I equated that to luck. He was lucky Joker decided to strike at Harvey when he was in Bruce's very home. Had Harvey been elsewhere, would Batman have failed like he did with Commissoner Loeb and Judge Sorillo? Very possibly, IMO.

- The chase was all planned for Joker to be caught. Why else was there an escort waiting to take Harvey prisoner and to the rigged warehouse? It was all planned. Joker wanted to be caught. He wanted to confront Batman. He wanted to make him choose between Harvey and Rachel. Thug with a bomb in his stomach etc. Joker was two steps ahead of all of them here.

- Saving Rachel from falling to her death, yes, fair play I'll give you that one.

- The sonar and preventing the ferries blowing up was all at the end. Like I said, that was when he did finally rise to the challenge. At the end. Never disputed that.

So The Joker wasn't fooled by thinking that Harvey Dent was Batman? I tought it was left ambigous. But nonetheless you make good points. If you don't mind I'll assume this:

You like more of a Tennis Game between hero and villain, the ball racing between extremes, with almost equal skill on both sides of the court but the villain getting tricky, while the hero coming back on every little trick that the villain hits him, and at the end, the hero finally gaining the upperhand and beat the villain in his own game.

Instead of the Tornado like villain which is unstoppable, causing catastrophes after catastrophes, until in the climatic third act, the hero rises up, and barely beats him, but not without casualties.

Although I'm a fan of both, I liked how in TDK was handled as the latter, it felt right after Batman basically overachieving in Batman Begins and enjoying victory before every enemy he fought (although not perfect and consequence free victories, but still purer than TDK's).

 

[Doc Samson]

Well the movie wouldnt really be exciting if Batman beat him every single time or they were a match. Movie and stories need to have conflict and strugle for the protagonists. And since its Joker and its his first time seeing him, he needs to loose once and awhile.

Agreed, the Man who Laughs, which is really just an update of Joker's first appearance, pretty much went on the path that TDK did, with Batman & the cops on their heels the whole time. Joker has always been of equal match, intelligence-wise, and on more than one occasion driven Batman to wits-end, it's what makes the rivalry so engaging.

I think this whole discussion is the result of two predictable human reactions. Name anything extremely successful, and no matter how great it really might be, there's a pack of people who will always dislike it, in order to be "different from the blind masses of sheep who flock to it." Basically people trying to be individuals, not recognizing that they're just like the other percentage of people who do the very same thing.

Likewise, name any sequel or remake, and no matter how good it really is, there will be a pack of people who swear it totally destroys the original, seemingly just because it's new. Pretty ironic, but personally, I think people need to just judge things on their merit, and if you honestly feel one way about it, so be it. It's entirely possible someone may not like TDK Joker, it isn't a crime to do so, but alot of it will also be people just trying not to "follow the crowd" and not based on any real undying love for Nicholson's Joker at all, just as people will bash B89 Joker for not being "scary" enough, totally forgetting that Nicholson was portraying the Joker pretty much how he was written at the time, and for a "goofy" version, killed way more people than Heath's did (if your into comparing those sort of things)

 

[MMoralN10Tion]

now were talkin...

mmhmm... BB showed a young Bruce outsmarting and taking down guys who weren't as good as him. And then he meets his match, whom he underestimated, in TDK. Of course he had a hard time stopping him, he wasn't ready by any means.

 

[Jokey]

Nostalgia can only go so far. Having been a fan of Batman (1989) and Jack's Joker, it is clear to me that Heath is superior. It is the best interpretation of the character in any medium. Ledger is the benchmark now. Jack's Joker was never definitive. It was fun. Good, bordering on great -and back in the day, it was pretty impressive. But I never, ever would have said it was the best portrayal of the character in any medium, because it didn't come close. I find with Ledger's Joker, you aren't laughing at him like you were with Nicholson. With Ledger, you are laughing a nervous chuckle at his pure psychotic behaviour, and almost feel guilty for doing so. But this... well, this is too good to top. In all liklihood, too good to equal, as well.

I just think it's amazing that Heath took a role that was so clearly Jack's and well known and brought something incredibly new and great to the table. He really nailed it. I got what I consider basically the perfect interpretation of Joker on screen. I'm happy it exists.

Ledger is a Joker for our times, realised in Nolan's realistic setting. He prefers the use of knifes, taking on any situation armed only with a knife is very much in line with The Joker's fearless attitude. For this version, you would not arm him with childish tools.

Don't get me started about 'revisionism'. Who's the fool that made The Joker the killer of Batman's parents? That there is a bigger revisionism than anything Ledger's Joker has done. Ledger's characteristics and behaviour remain the same. People who dislike this Joker are merely looking at the origin of Ledger's appearance and ruling everything associated with the character out. The essential trademarks of The Joker is that he has a white face, red lips, green hair, and purple clothing. It doesn't matter how he receives these things, what matters is that they are there. This new version is fresh and adds a new spin, while being absolutely faithful to the character.