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

[Two_Face]

Heath was the better actor, and that's a fact in my eyes. His Joker proves that. He had diversity in his roles, and the mark of a great actor is being able to change your voice for roles, which Heath did. I'll always love some of Jack's work, but he's no Heath Ledger.

 

[Harrygucha]

My question is: How does the Bat-pod run up the wall? Wouldn't the guns mounted on the vehicle hit the wall, causing the pod to crash???

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Oy, now it's back to criticizing Jack as an actor...of all things.

you talking to me crook? because i don't remember criticizing jack, i loved his joker but i loved his joker because it was jack on speed!!! thats the only reason.

 

[Crook]

the mark of a great actor is being able to change your voice for roles, which Heath did.

Absolute bull. That is simply a means of adding to your character's identity. It's not at all required to deliver a great performance, nor to be considered a great actor. If that were the case, then you've successfully eliminated 99% of Hollywood's most acclaimed actors in history.

 

[Crook]

...

 

[Ace of Knaves]

yea i agree, not ALL great actors have to vary their roles. look at chrisopher walken for example, i put him in acting royalty and he usually plays the kooky bad-ass.

 

[Keyser Soze]

Heath was the better actor, and that's a fact in my eyes. His Joker proves that. He had diversity in his roles, and the mark of a great actor is being able to change your voice for roles, which Heath did. I'll always love some of Jack's work, but he's no Heath Ledger.

Both Heath and Jack have their strengths. It's very easy for people to dismiss Jack and say he has no diversity (which is wrong, BTW), but crafting a persona as marketable and compelling as "Jack", The Brand, is a skill every bit as valuable as being a chameleon.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

yea jack is known world wide, from the slums of india to the mountains of tibet. that must take at least a ickle bit of talent

 

[TheBat812]

Jack and Heath have two very different acting styles. Having said that I have much more respect for Heath for actually changing his performances to fit the characters than molding characters to his performance the way Jack does.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

yea heath usually plays broody quiet types but in TDK he turned into a monstrous scenery chomper

 

[Freakzter]

When i watched TDK for the first time at the cinema, when The Joker is 'torturing' Brian the fake Batman, i think most people laughed until he said "LOOK AT ME", then suddenly i swear the WHOLE cinema went silent.

Classic moment....

Man I thought I was the only one who thought about that scene. It was so unexpected and startling lol, i love that scene to death. its so hard to believe that its heath ledger underneath all that sometimes.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

to be honest i find it hard to imagen its a human being under all that sometimes!

 

[regwec]

Heath also had the benefit of a much better script, let us remember.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

oh yea i'm in no way doubting jacks abilities, and i loved his joker. but the sole reason i loved his joker was because it was jack on speed!!

 

[p4poetic]

Fun to read old posts and ideas Just cause the latter is exactly what he did (except he actually ended up mixing the two -- "cheesy" and "gruesome" -- together).

So given that Nolan's Batman has explanations for everything (training, he doesn't make all his own gear because Lucius is helping, etc), Nolan's Joker is going to have to be grounded in the real world to a certain and significant extent. Movies--stories--ask you to suspend disbelief, sure. But you can't expect the audience to suspend significantly MORE disbelief about one character in the movie, or the tone of the story falls apart and it becomes very tawdry. So we can't have a Batman that gets all of his gear in plausible ways and then a Joker that--ALL OF A SUDDEN! FOR NO GOOD REASON! (thanks, Burton)--has a bunch of mime trained goons and rigged gag toys. I think this Joker is going to be a lot more about working with fairy ordinary things and making them uncomfortable and gruesome, rather than going for bright and cheap and cheesy "TA DA!" moments that would take a hell of a lot of resources to pull off.

 

[p4poetic]

Yep, you didn't see anything like that from Jack. Nope, sure didn't.

That's because it wasn't in the script.

no it was because jack was playing jack with make-up and a purple suit

Is this the new catchphrase now? Someone put it in the encyclopedia next to 'Comic Book Characters\Batman\The Joker' for the live action synopsis.

 

[Two_Face]

Some of the things Heath's Joker did weren't in the script either, and they turned out to be awesome scenes. He improvised, Jack didn't. Just admit it, Jack had a few good movies but has been playing himself for decades and is only a good actor, not great. I like him, but it's the truth.

 

[Yurka]

Am I the only one to think that Jacks Joker was more "unpredictable" than Heaths?

 

[LastSunrise1981]

Absolute bull. That is simply a means of adding to your character's identity. It's not at all required to deliver a great performance, nor to be considered a great actor. If that were the case, then you've successfully eliminated 99% of Hollywood's most acclaimed actors in history.

Well Two Face honestly does have a point now Crook. Jack's performance in my opinion was just Jack being Jack. However for that particular time period it fit because there was no way Heath's Joker could've been done faithfully on the big screen without controversy.

Jack's Joker is a definitive performance don't get me wrong now. I really enjoyed what he did for the character then, but whenver I read the comics THAT Joker was never in my head. I always felt that Heath's Joker would be the result if someone was to take the material seriously and make him an unstoppable force. Everything Heath did was perfect for me and was the personification on what the Joker is all about, you know?

 

[LastSunrise1981]

Am I the only one to think that Jacks Joker was more "unpredictable" than Heaths?

No, you're not the only one. But I definitely disagree. Jack's Joker was like watching your insane uncle try to be scary and fail ultimately. Heath's Joker was way more unpredictable with his methods because there was no indication on what he was going to do.

Spoiler

For example the fake Batman video. When he yells 'LOOK AT ME!" that was very, very unpredictable and caught me off guard.

 

[Dark Globe]

Screw Jack, it's all about Cesar Romero!!!!!!!!!

 

[Crook]

Well Two Face honestly does have a point now Crook. Jack's performance in my opinion was just Jack being Jack.

No, his physical nuances, voice, and speech patterns were Jack. Character-wise, he was Joker. I can almost guarantee if you were to give a list of what Jack did that was "too Jack, not Joker", you would find no proof in the comics or otherwise that would conclude it was out-of-character or exclusive to Jack himself.

I always felt that Heath's Joker would be the result if someone was to take the material seriously and make him an unstoppable force.

Watch the B89 DVD extras with Jack talking about the character, and come back and tell me that again. He's been quoted multiple times as saying it's his favorite role ever, and it's clear he believes he was born for that role (which was a popular notion even back before he was cast). Just because he didn't come up with a new voice or signature stance, doesn't mean he didn't give a crap about the role and just phoned it in. Jack and Heath took a very different acting approach to the character. You cannot fault one over the other just because they don't fit your preference.

Everything Heath did was perfect for me and was the personification on what the Joker is all about, you know?

I do like Heath, and so far he's king as far as interpretation goes, but that's really because he's stepped out of my collective consciousness of what the character embodies and didn't really remind me of anyone. Hence it was easier to believe, that what I was seeing, was exclusively Joker. However, that doesn't really take anything away from Jack. His performance was more "familiar" but the character he was playing was Joker all the way.

 

[SPIDERMAN117]

Honestly any actor who has portayed Joker in each film has done a great job at doing at.
Just depends which version you like best.

Cesar Romero had that accent when he played the Joker that made him kinda crazy like strangeness to it. He was pretty much a "Joker" you know it was best for that time because that was the fun times of 60's and Romero captured it perfectly


[YT]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CjiIHfKwi0Q&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CjiIHfKwi0Q&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/YT]

Jack Nicholson was a really great as The Joker because there was really no one else who could play him at the time. He took this joker and made him chessy but at the same time was great for Burtons world. Honeslty at time his Joker did laugh alot because it wasnt as dark but it was grreat because he would be calm for a second them "Boom" just do something that like "Wtf" you. Like his entrance as the Joker and the Whole "Super Gun" thing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKy5c_hNH-Q&feature=related

Heath Ledger was very much The Bob Kane Joker. You know the killer/ cause chaos for so many thing. The Darkest out of the 3 imo although Jack Joker did some crazy things to. Heath played the Joker like he was the Joker. He emboded who the Joker was at took him back to those roots as Crazy mad men killer. and The Dark Knight captured the darkness of what the Joker is.

Now you know what Heath did. I would post a video about his Joker but Ill get banned.












If you asked me who I though was the best? I say Heath because he took it upon himself. He had nothing to prove. He silenced his critics with the Tralier. and put them in a coffin with the movie.

So me. Heath was a better performance of the Joker.

Although Jack Nicholson was great to.

 

[Freakzter]

yea, see i dont think anybody can dispute jack's acting and say it sucked. cuz it obviously did NOT suck. but ledger HAD to be better (cuz everybody knew he would get compared to previous jokers), and its very hard to top something good, but he did it, and thats why it blew us all away.

ppl shouldnt get offended when we say heath was better than jack. you cant translate that to "jack nicolson sucked" cuz that would mean we are saying "heath ledger sucked less." to say someone was a better joker than nicolson is ALOT. ledger was "EPIC", becuz thats the only way you can beat "awesome".

i just feel sorry for whoevers the next guy who will be portraying the joker in some new batman movie series 20 years from now...

 

[Two_Face]

Absolute bull. That is simply a means of adding to your character's identity. It's not at all required to deliver a great performance, nor to be considered a great actor. If that were the case, then you've successfully eliminated 99% of Hollywood's most acclaimed actors in history.

I meant it is one of the ways to show how much acting skill you have. In any case, my statement remains: Jack is good, not great or anything close to great. His Joker isn't anything close to being as good as Heath's, nor was he as good an actor.