The Dark Knight The Man Who Laughs: The Joker Thread 2.0

[PyroChamber]

Did anyone besides me sense a little bit of Mark Hamill in his voice during the video of him with the fake Batman?

 

[Spade]

Usually, this sort of hype is impossible to live up to. But Ledger never failed to impress. It's a shame I'll never see his take past this one film.

 

[samsnee]

Does anyone wonder what Joker's true motives were? I know he's just a force of nature and doesn't have a "true" motive, but throughout the movie, it seems like he just wants anarchy. But then when burning the money, he says "This town is mine now" like he wants to actually rule Gotham, which is the opposite of anarchy.

 

[Grommers]

Yeah, I never understood that in the comics, he doesnt want order but wants to be the leader?

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i think its because he wants to be the leader of a new world.......a world without rules!!

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Exactly my argument here, that its his weak-point: having multiple escape routes out of an ugly situation. I mean you can always say, hey that origin didn't so why not stick this one instead, that just shows that no writer has faith in his origin and that the character is like a half blank slate which could be half-filled depending on the situation.

geeze i think youll find in a lot of the comics especially the seminal THE KILLING JOKE joker didnt have a clue what his past was. "If i'm going to have a past, i prefer it to be multiple choice!"

 

[Beanjuice]

He wants to be the hand that unleashes th chaos and no one else. Organized chaos is all he wants

 

[Ace of Knaves]

yea exactly if anyone is going to bring the batman and gotham to its knees only he is aloud to do it! it reminds me of the TAS episode MAD LOVE. harley quin captures batman and is about to do what joker could never do but he goes mad at her and beats the crap out of her and frees batman saying only he can kill him.

 

[8Diagrams(WU)]

Ledger did a great job using his acting talents to deliver the role, but the screenplay also plays a huge role in presenting the character and giving him a certain profile. Most people a year ago didnt think ledger was the right choice for joker and he dropped a great performance. Of course another actor can do it. It would take someone with a lot of talent but it can be done.

People will have this movie and the next few years to admire Ledgers joker. I know I will. However, the joker doesnt die with Heath, and the show must go on. The joker was the catalyst of everything that is going to carry onto the next movie, so I do think he still has a role to play next movie. The looks and age of the actor arent as important as they will be hiding under prostetics anyways...we just need someone talented. My number 1 rule in life is trust Nolan, and Im completely sure he can deliver a joker with another talented actor.

 

[Raiden]

How is it at all like Hannibal or Sparrow? Heath is the third person to play the live-action role and make no mistake, the previous guys were no slouches in mainstream reception either.

No disrespect to Heath, but he is no way in hell the only person that can play this role. And if he were alive today, I guarantee he'd tell you the same exact thing. It's foolish to assume that NOW, Joker has been done right and even amidst a great modern performance, an encore is impossible.

Over a year ago, people weren't even considering Heath for Joker. What makes you think that this isn't the case here for many other male actors?

While I don't think Heath should be the only actor to interpret Joker after his brilliant performance in TDK, I feel that his interpretation in the Nolan trilogy should be preserved, and not tainted by recasting the role to a different actor (even one as talented as Depp). There will be another Batman movies after Nolan's trilogy concluded, and I'm sure there will be another director who will have a new Batman and a new Joker. That Joker will probably be nothing like Heath's version, and I'm fine with that. But imo Heath's Joker will probably never be surpassed on the big screen.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i dont see why paul bettany couldnt be the joker in nolans unverse. yea heaths joker wont be topped. but bettany could at least look like heaths joker and in terms of characteristics maybe a lengthy spell in arkham may of changed him somewhat?

 

[samsnee]

I've seen Paul Bettany a couple of times as he and Jennifer Connelly live on my block, and that dude is tall. Like 6'4 or 6'5. How tall is Bale? I ask because it would look odd if Joker towers over Batman when standing next to him.

 

[samsnee]

double post

 

[GCityCoffee]

i dont see why paul bettany couldnt be the joker in nolans unverse. yea heaths joker wont be topped. but bettany could at least look like heaths joker and in terms of characteristics maybe a lengthy spell in arkham may of changed him somewhat?

Hmm, I think Bettany could be a good Joker, but IMO it's a bad idea to recast Joker for a third movie. Joker was portrayed and written so well in TDK that I don't think he should be recast and re-portrayed in the third movie. I do think though that the third movie could still deal with the effect that the Joker had on Gotham, while not necessarily including him as a character.

 

[SuperKoala]

my loyalty is with jack nicholson

 

[GCityCoffee]

Nicholson was good, but the writers put him in too many scenes that weren't very good. Ledger's Joker was much better used.

 

[The Batman]

Honestly...whats the point of bringing joker back? Seriously. Why? Even if Heath were still alive, Joker's role wouldnt be as good as in TDK. And with Heath gone, its even easier for me to say that Joker shouldnt and dosent need to be in B3...time for nolan to bring an interpretation of a new villain.

 

[The Sage]

Joker did pretty much make his statement in TDK. No point in bringing him back unless it's for a cameo.

 

[FoJacob]

Honestly...whats the point of bringing joker back? Seriously. Why? Even if Heath were still alive, Joker's role wouldnt be as good as in TDK. And with Heath gone, its even easier for me to say that Joker shouldnt and dosent need to be in B3...time for nolan to bring an interpretation of a new villain.

Well said. Sometimes less is actually more. We all want more, but more doesn't always turn out very well. I use the example of Captain Jack Sparrow in Pirates. I absolutely love the character, but maybe it would have been better just to leave him in the one, first movie. Because, although I enjoyed the second and third films in a summery-popcorn movie sort of way, they weren't nearly as good as the first. People wanted to see Jack Sparrow again and so the filmmakers complied and we got some... less than stellar sequels. (In my opinion, at least). Sometimes it's best just to leave well enough alone.

And, yeah, I can't see how - narratively speaking - the Joker's return would do anything to further the story that Nolan is trying to tell about Batman. The Joker has already killed the woman he loved, created chaos in Gotham, and made Batman into a hunted vigilante. What he's done in this film can't be topped. The best thing they could do, I think, in terms of at least satisfying our longing to see the Joker again would be to insert his laugh or a line of dialogue or something to suggest at the end of the third that he has escaped Arkham - and that, though Nolan's films are over, the war between Batman and the Joker will go on.

But please, no recast. Or I might just

 

[batgirl27]

...

 

[phillyboy]

Well said. Sometimes less is actually more. We all want more, but more doesn't always turn out very well. I use the example of Captain Jack Sparrow in Pirates. I absolutely love the character, but maybe it would have been better just to leave him in the one, first movie. Because, although I enjoyed the second and third films in a summery-popcorn movie sort of way, they weren't nearly as good as the first. People wanted to see Jack Sparrow again and so the filmmakers complied and we got some... less than stellar sequels. (In my opinion, at least). Sometimes it's best just to leave well enough alone.

And, yeah, I can't see how - narratively speaking - the Joker's return would do anything to further the story that Nolan is trying to tell about Batman. The Joker has already killed the woman he loved, created chaos in Gotham, and made Batman into a hunted vigilante. What he's done in this film can't be topped. The best thing they could do, I think, in terms of at least satisfying our longing to see the Joker again would be to insert his laugh or a line of dialogue or something to suggest at the end of the third that he has escaped Arkham - and that, though Nolan's films are over, the war between Batman and the Joker will go on.

But please, no recast. Or I might just

I agree, I laugh from his cell at Arkham would be enough for me. Maybe even use some unused audio from TDK, like a quick one-liner as someone walks past his cell.

 

[The Caped Knight]

 

[Pho3nix]

I agree with most of the other posts, I'd love to hear a laugh from one of the cells or some news clip that says that the Joker has escaped.

 

[Spade]

Does anyone wonder what Joker's true motives were? I know he's just a force of nature and doesn't have a "true" motive, but throughout the movie, it seems like he just wants anarchy. But then when burning the money, he says "This town is mine now" like he wants to actually rule Gotham, which is the opposite of anarchy.

The Joker makes it clear that he makes up his mind as he goes along. I imagine that even if he did establish a rule over Gotham, it'd either be every man for himself or he'd intentionally run the new establishment into the ground. He's random like that. His only real goal is to show that scheming and rules must eventually fall to insanity when faced with madness.

 

[terry78]

Joker only really had a motive at times occasionally, both in the comics as well as in animated and live media, but it was usually just a cover to do more damage.