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

[Ace of Knaves]

it would be quality if a special feature on the dvd/blu-ray is a sorta joker diary, following heath around in between shoots and stuff.

 

[FoJacob]

i kind of disagree about the last part, to be honest. from what i've read, heath was brought on before the script had even been written, and had a very big hand in crafting the portrayal of the joker. he came up with the look and the voice, which are two very huge things. who else would have thought to have the joker talk like a ventriloquist dummy? the fact that he holed himself up in a hotel and wrote a joker diary speaks to how much he created.
i could be wrong, though, but if i recall a few interviews with nolan and heath both backed up that he was cast before the script...but maybe i just made that up?

Very well said. To suggest that any other actor given the same material could put in just as good a performance is, IMO, ridiculous - not to mention downright disrespectful to Heath and all the work he put into the role. A great performance is always a combination of the actor and the material/direction - it is kind of like a chemical reaction. One actor plus the given material might be very good, another with the same material might be terrible, and a third with the same material might be phenomenal. I think it was like that with this Joker. Heath + Jonah Nolan's script and Chris Nolan's direction was the perfect combination, a "chemical reaction" - so to speak - that produced something remarkable. It was like lightning in a bottle, and it would be very hard - if not impossible - to catch that same magic twice.

Give a bad actor brilliant material/direction and he will still turn in a bad performance. On the other hand, a brilliant actor will not necessarily deliver as unique and excellent a performance as another actor in the same role with the same material. It's the combination of the material and the particular actor and sometimes it's good and sometimes it's magic.

And Nolan has stated in multiple interviews that when he and Heath initially met to discuss the role, Heath told him that he already knew how he would play the Joker. Chris may have provided the direction, Jonah may have provided the words on the page, but it certainly sounds to me like Heath largely created the particular Joker we see on the screen, drawing influences from various sources and giving them a unique spin.

 

[Hello Beautiful]

it would be quality if a special feature on the dvd/blu-ray is a sorta joker diary, following heath around in between shoots and stuff.

Oh yes, I'm really hoping for something like that. Please make it so!

 

[regwec]

Very well said. To suggest that any other actor given the same material could put in just as good a performance is, IMO, ridiculous - not to mention downright disrespectful to Heath

That's most likely because you're quite small minded, and dishonest in your misappropriated sense of "sympathy" for a dead man whom you never knew. It also probably reflects either laziness or confusion on your part with reference to my post, in which I merely said that another actor had a "good chance" of achieving a fine performance with the same creative team backing him up. I don't think anyone could genuinely dispute that sentiment. It might work, it might not. But to suggest it couldn't work is either naive or ignorant. Critically, you have chosen to overlook (or haven't understood) the core of the discussion- that Heath admitted to an unfamiliarity with the source material, and that research and character development of that type must have been taken out of his hands.

And, just for the sake of obsessive clarity, I never suggested that a "bad" actor could achieve the same performance with the same support. But you realised that, I'm sure.

 

[shapeshifter]

^ but would a different actor have used the same sources on which to base his character? Also not to nitpick but from what I have read Heath did a fair amount of ad libbing that might not have been the case with another actor.
I'm not picking a side here, just making a few observations. do with them what you will

 

[regwec]

Well, that's what is in question. Heath is apparently on record as saying that he doesn't care much for comics, and was barely able to finish a single one, even after he had a lucrative contract to play a key role in an adaptation of the genre. Nevertheless, the role he played clearly showed due deference to the source material, and a keen degree of research into the same. For those two variables to co-exist, that aspect of the job must have been taken off Heath's hands, and done by someone else.

If Heath's comments were misrepresented, then of course he deserves a lot of credit for researching his part.

If they are not, then he still deserves massive credit for the way he brought the script to life; but I believe that a similarly talented actor could, would and will achieve something just as good (although different) with the same creative team.

This isn't about dancing on Heath's grave, or undermining him, or converesely revering him as some sort of divinity. The poor fellow died, much too young, and after giving a memorable performance for the ages, which I look forward to enjoying with my children in decades to come. But he is dead. Gone. Must his work, and its legacy, die with him? I didn't know Heath. But if I were him, I would not have wanted that to have been the case.

 

[Toxin72]

I thought I read the heath read the killing joke and liked it but didn't like arkham asylum.

 

[FoJacob]

Heath's performance was indisputably brilliant, but I do think there needs to be a fair assessment of how much credit is due to him and to others for the way the character finally appeared on screen.

You are calling into question with this how much of the performance was Heath's creation and how much was due to the Nolans writing and direction. Got it. Therefore I countered with this:

And Nolan has stated in multiple interviews that when he and Heath initially met to discuss the role, Heath told him that he already knew how he would play the Joker. Chris may have provided the direction, Jonah may have provided the words on the page, but it certainly sounds to me like Heath largely created the particular Joker we see on the screen, drawing influences from various sources and giving them a unique spin.

I also discussed how a particular performance can be the result of a unique combination of an actor and a role, and how expecting that the same magic can be replicated with the same role/material/influences and a different actor may be impossible.

Some people always object that Heath's Joker was unique, and visionary, and that no other actor could match it. But the role, as it was handed to him, was a gift- a golden opportunity for him to showcase his talent. Another actor, in a Chris Nolan movie with a script penned by Jonah, stands a good chance.

Again it seemed to me that you were suggesting that because of the Nolan brothers direction and writing Heath really didn't have to put any extraordinary creative effort or homework into the role, as it was already well developed for him, and that if the role had been given to any other actor the performance would have proven just as special. Okay. So I said:

To suggest that any other actor given the same material could put in just as good a performance is, IMO, ridiculous - not to mention downright disrespectful to Heath and all the work he put into the role. A great performance is always a combination of the actor and the material/direction - it is kind of like a chemical reaction. One actor plus the given material might be very good, another with the same material might be terrible, and a third with the same material might be phenomenal. I think it was like that with this Joker. Heath + Jonah Nolan's script and Chris Nolan's direction was the perfect combination, a "chemical reaction" - so to speak - that produced something remarkable. It was like lightning in a bottle, and it would be very hard - if not impossible - to catch that same magic twice.

Please note that I call the suggestion that another actor could have given the same or a similarly brilliant performance with the same material ridiculous in my opinion. I did not call you ridiculous or resort to the kind of personal attack and insult that you, for some reason, felt necessary in your response.

The reason that in my opinion I feel that it isn't possible is because of the reason I stated above, that every performance is a unique combination of actor and role.

And, just for the sake of obsessive clarity, I never suggested that a "bad" actor could achieve the same performance with the same support. But you realised that, I'm sure.

Despite my small mind, I did realize that. I'm sure you realized that I was making a general statement about how source material/director/screenwriter can not be given credit for an actor's performance, whether good or bad.

Critically, you have chosen to overlook (or haven't understood) the core of the discussion- that Heath admitted to an unfamiliarity with the source material, and that research and character development of that type must have been taken out of his hands.

I didn't overlook or misunderstand the core of the discussion. My point in writing my post was to respond to your suggestion - as repeated above - that the Nolan brothers, by integrating the history of the character into both direction and screenplay, did the majority of Heath's work for him and that therefore he had little to do with the crafting of the character we see in the film. Heath did state in an interview that he had been given several comics for reference, including The Killing Joke. Grant Morrison also recently commented on how Heath had picked up on some of the Joker's characteristics in The Clown at Midnight, which Morrison himself believed was little read. So obviously Heath did feel that there was valuable information to be gleaned from the comics and did his homework.

That's most likely because you're quite small minded, and dishonest in your misappropriated sense of "sympathy" for a dead man whom you never knew.

Without questioning the small-mindedness of someone who chooses to respond to a discussion in such a manner or who would call "misappropriated" anyone's sympathy for someone who died, let me make clear that I was never even a fan of Ledger's before this film. So my defense of how much of this performance is due to his talent and creativity does not come from favoritism or some worshipful regard of him. It comes from my respect for an excellent performance, the kind of performance that comes around all too rarely.

I apologize if I did misinterpret any of your comments, as it was not done intentionally, and if my use of the word "ridiculous" was too strong and offended you, again please know that it was directed at an "idea" (and was only my opinion), not at you. Clearly you are in favor of recasting and I am not, and we are equally passionate in our opinions. However, I don't think insults and name-calling were necessary.

But to suggest it couldn't work is either naive or ignorant.

I would call it erring on the side of being realistic.

 

[deathfromabove]

well said.

it seems there are quite a few around these parts who resort to insult and ad hominim attack when faced with a differing opinion.

small minded indeed.

 

[TheCardPlayer]

I agree with Regwec. Heath was the best Joker ever. No one will ever do better than him as the Clown Prince Of Crime for me. He was the Joker I always wanted to see.

It was him that gave the character his tics, his energy. He created one of the most memorable villains to ever shine on the big screen.

But I don't want his creation to die with him. I don't want the character to dissapear forever because of his death. It would be disrepecful to his creative genius. He poured his soul into creating this Joker.

Let's not act like he never existed because of his death. Let's celebrate the incredible character he created by letting others portray him. No one will ever do better, but let's not kill the character AND the actor.

 

[shapeshifter]

going to be some big shoes to fill.

 

[ronny]

I agree with Regwec. Heath was the best Joker ever. No one will ever do better than him as the Clown Prince Of Crime for me. He was the Joker I always wanted to see.

Never say ever.
Sooner or later someone will better what Ledger did. Whether or not you can take off your rose tinted glasses when that happens is another thing.
Why, some people still prefer Nicholson to Ledger, is that because he was better? Or because the passing of time has blinded them to the truth?
Who knows.
Maybe even you won't be able to tell when the time comes. But it will happen, The Joker is too good a character to be left with one actor and one movie.

 

[Toxin72]

Never say ever.
Sooner or later someone will better what Ledger did. Whether or not you can take off your rose tinted glasses when that happens is another thing.
Why, some people still prefer Nicholson to Ledger, is that because he was better? Or because the passing of time has blinded them to the truth?
Who knows.
Maybe even you won't be able to tell when the time comes. But it will happen, The Joker is too good a character to be left with one actor and one movie.

It's true that the joker will eventually be played by someone else but there is no guarantee that he'll be better than ledgers.

 

[p4poetic]

Some people still prefer Mark Hamil's Joker, it doesn't matter. It's not about "best" because best is subjective; "favorite" would be more accurate.

 

[The Caped Knight]

Originally posted by JokerLedger in The Dark Knight Merchandise

Originally Posted by Spidey_D.N.

 

[Magenta666]

*if i had a million dollars*

 

[Carusos Shades]

Interesting merchandise! Halfway down on the second pic of joker figure does it say bat poo?!!(beside batmobile text)

 

[D.B.]

I would most definently purchase that figure. How much is it going for?

 

[regwec]

FoJacob, I clearly overreacted to your comments, and I apologise for that.

deathfromabove, it's comforting to see that the bulk of your unnecessary posts can still be summarised by the childish icons with which you inevitably litter them.

 

[SPIDERMAN117]

Amazing Toy

 

[deathfromabove]

FoJacob, I clearly overreacted to your comments, and I apologise for that.

deathfromabove, it's comforting to see that the bulk of your unnecessary posts can still be summarised by the childish icons with which you inevitably litter them.

yes, because a roll eye smiley easily summarizes the notion of civility and respect towards others.

but your post reinforces my point that some just cant resist belittling. its ok. some like to step on others shoes to make theirs look cleaner.

 

[deathfromabove]

oh and

 

[regwec]

yes, because a roll eye smiley easily summarizes the notion of civility and respect towards others.

I suppose that you haven't managed to write what you mean, but just to be clear; are you actually inferring that rolling your eyes is polite?

but your post reinforces my point that some just cant resist belittling. its ok. some like to step on others shoes to make theirs look cleaner.

No, I merely gave you a mild and measured rebuke for your needless involvement of yourself in a matter in which your dubious insight was not required.

Run along now, until the next time you want to act as the excitable cheerleader for whomever disagrees with me then.

 

[The ?]

HA! He got itty bitty smiley faces coming out of a big smiley face...

And that toy scares me how much it looks like heath ledger, I'm not kidding. It would not sleep with that in my room... I'd feel it watching me.


,

?

 

[deathfromabove]

I suppose that you haven't managed to write what you mean, but just to be clear; are you actually inferring that rolling your eyes is polite?

no rolling eyes (and smileys in general) are used by me to show that its not so serious. if you want to infer them as childish go right ahead.

No, I merely gave you a mild and measured rebuke for your needless involvement of yourself in a matter in which your dubious insight was not required.

no you suggested that i am sticking my nose where it doesnt belong and that my contributions to this board can be summed up as generally childish. public message board sir.

if i want to compliment someone's measured and reasoned defense of himself and his opinion i will do so.

Run along now, until the next time you want to act as the excitable cheerleader for whomever disagrees with me then.

it has nothing to do with you reg but rather the increasingly constant need for some to bring into question another poster's intelligence when faced with a differing opinion.
i thought his response to you was as i stated "well said".

if you notice i didnt even direct my comment at you but rather to the poster who was defending himself from an overzealous (by your admission) reaction to his comments.