Bravo!!!, I really think this wonderful actor has left us one of the most amazing performances in the history of films, Heath Ledger has captured a very attractive and powerful aspect of the Joker's character, he left everything on the set, his oustanding performance should really be rewarded with the OSCAR.
Guys, I appreciate your thoughts and God bless you all Batman fans around the world ! :) (//)
Yes he was exellent and nothing short of that....but Oscar worthy i just don't think so. I have seen so many better performance's that didn't get the Oscar, so for him to get one would make me believe it's because of his death and the Dark Kight Hype.
I think he deserves an Oscar as well. He truly stands out in the film, and he's basically the reason why TDK is such a sucess. You also have to remember Heath Ledger was an Australian actor. He pulled off 2 accents at the same time. While delivering mesmerizing dialogue, and characteristics of the Joker we have never seen before.
Quote from: Joker89 on Wed, 30 Jul 2008, 20:54
I think he deserves an Oscar as well. He truly stands out in the film, and he's basically the reason why TDK is such a sucess. You also have to remember Heath Ledger was an Australian actor. He pulled off 2 accents at the same time. While delivering mesmerizing dialogue, and characteristics of the Joker we have never seen before.
Indeed. In his message to the mob at the start of the film, I couldn't believe what I was seeing. He just came out of nowhere, had this amazing power about him and then he left. He was incredible to watch on screen. It is a tragedy he will never reprise the role.
A young 29 year old actor that dies tragically before his prime while immersing himself in a totally "out-there" role. However, he nailed the part.
This is the first time ever there is Oscar talk for acting in a COMIC BOOK film.
...
I hope he gets a posthumus nomination. There will surely be better performances this season in more oscaristic films (there's many months ahead), but I seriously hope he is considered.
He will most definately be nominated for "Best Actor" when the Oscars roll around, but theres no guarentee that he will win the award. Only time will tell.
I thought he was excellent in the role. But not oscar worthy.
Although I am not a fan of the Oscars, better performances have been snubbed.
Some cant help think that this Oscar call is partly because he died, a sympothy vote.
Me, myself would be very jubious if Ledger won, not only for the sympothy vote, but because there has been an internet campaign by Nolanites and anti Nicholson and Burton fans for him to win the oscar since the first teaser trailer!!! Many months before the film was released.
For this I am very synical about the whole Oscar thing. Its so fake, how can anyone take it serious if he wins? (why so serious lol)
Its a fad.
And why do people keep going on about Ledger's looks and the fact he changed his manorism's and voice to become his character. Of course its great, but why use that as a reason to win the oscar.
Loads of actors have done this and dont even get nominated!
Quote from: Joker81 on Thu, 7 Aug 2008, 20:21
Me, myself would be very jubious if Ledger won, not only for the sympothy vote, but because there has been an internet campaign by Nolanites and anti Nicholson and Burton fans for him to win the oscar since the first teaser trailer!!! Many months before the film was released.
I never understood the phenomenon myself. Right from the start, the Nolanites were in a frenzy over a whoppin' two lines of dialogue from Ledger.
QuoteIts a fad.
Mass hysteria is more like it.
Quote from: Joker81 on Thu, 7 Aug 2008, 20:21
I thought he was excellent in the role. But not oscar worthy.
Although I am not a fan of the Oscars, better performances have been snubbed.
Some cant help think that this Oscar call is partly because he died, a sympothy vote.
Me, myself would be very jubious if Ledger won, not only for the sympothy vote, but because there has been an internet campaign by Nolanites and anti Nicholson and Burton fans for him to win the oscar since the first teaser trailer!!! Many months before the film was released.
For this I am very synical about the whole Oscar thing. Its so fake, how can anyone take it serious if he wins? (why so serious lol)
Its a fad.
I agree now im not saying that Ledger did bad or but i still don't think it was Oscar worthy. Now im not saying this because i perfer the Burton movies i mean im Heath Ledgers biggest fan but even i will say that the whole Oscar thing has come around as a result of his death along with alot of anoying what i like to call HypeFans.
As for the Oscars i really don't pay any attention to them anymore it's just become BS like most others. To many great performances getting snubbed for ones that are more popular.
Quote from: Joker81 on Thu, 7 Aug 2008, 20:26
And why do people keep going on about Ledger's looks and the fact he changed his manorism's and voice to become his character.
Yes its called acting most of them do it. I guess those Nolanites don't watch many movies or they'd know that
I think that he deserves a nomination if anything. It'd be dubious if he didn't. I'd have him win it, but that is another matter.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Fri, 8 Aug 2008, 03:08
I think that he deserves a nomination if anything. It'd be dubious if he didn't. I'd have him win it, but that is another matter.
We know you would!
I agree with ya 100% Sandman and thecoloursblend!!
Ah, very well. Ledger's Joker wisely shook up the system and remained true to the character.
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances."
Hummm But as much as i hate to say it to say that his Joker is popular *NOT* because of his death would be a lie. I know Nolanites go extremely overboard somtimes with there nothing is better then Nolan's films attitude but im sure even with there extreme tendency's to over hype the movie his Joker would not have been so popular had he lived.
QuoteAh, very well. Ledger's Joker wisely shook up the system and remained true to the character
I have heard heaps of nolan fans say this and i know he is meant to be based of the 40's Joker but i just don't see it. I see a completely freash new take on The Joker but nothing of the orignal.
The performance is the performance. It would have received the same ammount of praise. His death has only elevated it to legendary status.
You don't see ANY of the original character there? I'm very certain this has been debated in another thread.
It was never really resolved either, only dropped by one of the participants.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 01:58
It was never really resolved either, only dropped by one of the participants.
It can be resumed and thrashed out over there if it has to be discussed.
I'm quite sure one of the participants doesn't care either way.
Bringing this back on topic somewhat, I saw the movie again yesterday and while I still think highly of it, I maintain that Ledger's performance (while exceptional) doesn't merit an Oscar nomination.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 02:18
Bringing this back on topic somewhat, I saw the movie again yesterday and while I still think highly of it, I maintain that Ledger's performance (while exceptional) doesn't merit an Oscar nomination.
Please explain
Quote from: BurtonBatman on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 02:26
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 02:18
Bringing this back on topic somewhat, I saw the movie again yesterday and while I still think highly of it, I maintain that Ledger's performance (while exceptional) doesn't merit an Oscar nomination.
Please explain
Yes, please do. If one of the Joker's deserves an Oscar for their portrayal, it is certainly Ledger over Nicholson in my view.
I would've thought by saying "Ledger's performance... doesn't merit an Oscar nomination", I would've made my views quite clear.
Also, the issue at hand (for some reason) is whether or not Ledger deserves an Oscar, not whether Nicholson deserved one. While I don't remember what else came out in 1989, I venture that he didn't deserve an Oscar either.
I'll close by saying that if Ledger does somehow win an Oscar for TDK, it'll be entirely a sympathy vote... unless Oscar season REALLY sucks this year.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 02:37Yes, please do. If one of the Joker's deserves an Oscar for their portrayal, it is certainly Ledger over Nicholson in my view.
As I've seen more and more of Nicholson's performances outside of B89 like Witches of Eastwick, his Joker seems more and more like Jack with Joker make-up. Now I love Jack's Joker, but Ledger one-upped him. If you compare the two, most would easily recognize the actor who played the Joker in B89 even if they had never seen the film but was familiar with Jack's body of work, I don't think it would be the same with Ledger's Joker.
For me, Oscar worthy means someone who completely emmersed themselves in the role, so much so that you forget who the actor is and lose yourself in his/her portrayal.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 02:59
I would've thought by saying "Ledger's performance... doesn't merit an Oscar nomination", I would've made my views quite clear.
Also, the issue at hand (for some reason) is whether or not Ledger deserves an Oscar, not whether Nicholson deserved one. While I don't remember what else came out in 1989, I venture that he didn't deserve an Oscar either.
I'll close by saying that if Ledger does somehow win an Oscar for TDK, it'll be entirely a sympathy vote... unless Oscar season REALLY sucks this year.
Nope, not clear at all. Just curious about the criteria you use to judge who you think is worthy of an Oscar. You said Ledger did not deserve one, but never said why you thought that.
And if he does win, you think it will be "entirely" based on sympathy? You are saying that no one, and I mean no one will want to recognize his performance? I don't buy that for a second.
You said that you did not think he deserved one. I would've thought you would have elaborated your reasons why. Can't expect too much from people they days I suppose.
I am aware what the topic is. I was saying that if you compared the two Jokers, Ledger wipes the floor with Nicholson. As has been said, Nicholson was playing himself with makeup on.
Nicholson didn't deserve an Oscar or even talk of one then, and compared to Ledger's Joker, he most certainly doesn't now. It'd be sour grapes from the Nicholson/Burton crowd if Ledger got that Oscar, they couldn't stand it. It would officially label him better of the two.
A further nail in the coffin is that The Dark Knight is going to overtake Batman (1989) as the highest grossing Batman film (regardless of the inflation and adjusted box office). So take that! ;)
Quote from: BurtonBatman on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 03:12As I've seen more and more of Nicholson's performances outside of B89 like Witches of Eastwick, his Joker seems more and more like Jack with Joker make-up.
Correct. In a sense, Jack was essentially hired to play himself, as the Joker in the comics is basically a more maniacal version of the Nicholson stereotype. Not always and, arguably, not so much in the past 5+ years but the Joker of the 70's, 80's and a good bit of the 90's is well-represented by Nicholson.
QuoteNow I love Jack's Joker, but Ledger one-upped him.
In terms of immersing himself in the role, maybe, maybe not. In terms of reflecting the comics, it's not even competitive. Jack is *CLEARLY* the Joker from that era of the comics. The best anybody can argue about Ledger is that he's the Joker from Batman #1... but even that's up for debate as that Joker was a killer and thief who played for profit. He wasn't an anarchist, unless introducing a little anarchy would further his aims. That Joker isn't likely to burn cash. By contrast, the modern day Joker would as he certainly does enjoy a little anarchy but his demented sense of humor is utterly absent from TDK. As a result, you end up with the worst of both of these two different Jokers in TDK.
Granted these things aren't Ledger's fault but in terms of purely enjoying one Joker over another, it's hands down Nicholson for me.
Quote from: BurtonBatman on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 03:12Nope, not clear at all. Just curious about the criteria you use to judge who you think is worthy of an Oscar. You said Ledger did not deserve one, but never said why you thought that.
Tons of actors "immerse themselves in the role". Ledger didn't reinvent the wheel by doing that.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 03:13I am aware what the topic is. I was saying that if you compared the two Jokers, Ledger wipes the floor with Nicholson. As has been said, Nicholson was playing himself with makeup on.
That's who the Joker is and that's what Nicholson was hired to do.
QuoteNicholson didn't deserve an Oscar or even talk of one then, and compared to Ledger's Joker, he most certainly doesn't now. It'd be sour grapes from the Nicholson/Burton crowd if Ledger got that Oscar, they couldn't stand it. It would officially label him better of the two.
You could give Ledger a gold medal in women's figure skating for all I care, it doesn't change my opinions about his performance.
QuoteA further nail in the coffin is that The Dark Knight is going to overtake Batman (1989) as the highest grossing Batman film (regardless of the inflation and adjusted box office). So take that!
I'm cool with that. I don't need my opinions to be validated by the popular majority. It was only ever going to be a matter of time until a Batman flick came along to do what TDK is poised to do. Luckily my ego is not at stake here. B89 is a better film than TDK. So is BR. I don't need the masses to agree with me in order to be right. I am right and that's enough for me.
There is no maybe or maybe not. It is. Ledger one-upped Nicholson. Symbolically, Nicholson throws away fake money, Ledger burns real money.
In terms of enjoying the two Jokers, it is Ledger hands down for me. He locked himself in his room for a month and delivered a layered, fascinatingly dangerous performance. I expected every window and every quiet moment to explode into anarchy. Unrelenting menace hovered over every scene like a dark cloud. That could not be said of Nicholson, no matter how he was asked to play it.
True, actors immerse themselves in their roles, but Ledger was totally absorbed. He did an absolutely fantastic job. He did re-invent the wheel in terms of the character of The Joker, as many have said, Nicholson included. He took it to a whole new level. I rank it the best portrayal of the character in ANY medium. Every word of dialogue was tailored to what Ledger created. His mannerisms were bizarre; he defied the basic form of walking. His words were meaningful, intelligent, darkly humorous and utterly terrifying.
This performance does warrant an Oscar, whether people want to declare this or not.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 04:03There is no maybe or maybe not. It is. Ledger one-upped Nicholson. Symbolically, Nicholson throws away fake money, Ledger burns real money.
I don't think anything in the movie actually says the cashmoneymoolah was fake. It's in the comic adaptation and maybe the novelization but the movie suggests nothing more than legit cash.
QuoteIn terms of enjoying the two Jokers, it is Ledger hands down for me. He locked himself in his room for a month and delivered a layered, fascinatingly dangerous performance.
Which wasn't anything to do with the comics. There's simply no escaping that.
The money was fake. It's in the comic adaption and the novel. You can't just disregard those. That's that. There's simply no escaping that.
Heath locking himself away was pure dedication. For you to say his version was nothing at all to do with the comics is an ultimate cop out. You just don't want it to be, and to keep justifying Nicholson. Get real.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 07:15The money was fake. It's in the comic adaption and the novel. You can't just disregard those. That's that. There's simply no escaping that.
Sorry, no. I don't. I don't even know if that part was even filmed. It's not included in the movie so those things shouldn't count... unless, of course, we're supposed to believe, all evidence to the contrary aside, Knox somehow wound up covered in Batman's cape at the end of the movie.
QuoteHeath locking himself away was pure dedication. For you to say his version was nothing at all to do with the comics is an ultimate cop out. You just don't want it to be, and to keep justifying Nicholson. Get real.
The Joker in modern comics does not behave the way Ledger's Joker did. That's not open to debate, it's fact. The comic book Joker has far greater resonance with Nicholson's portrayal. This too is fact. And like I said, my ego isn't at stake here. If a superior portrayal of the Joker comes along (which I think BTAS in large part is better) I'm ready, willing and able to label it as such... but Ledger's simply isn't. When it comes to live action, Nicholson's Joker is still top dog. His character
is the Joker; Ledger's character was Hannibal Lecter in makeup. Ledger did a fantastic job and stole almost every scene he was in but he was the Joker pretty much in name only.
Quotebut Ledger was totally absorbed. He did an absolutely fantastic job. He did re-invent the wheel in terms of the character of The Joker
Talk about a broken record. Let's see if i can finish this off i have heard this argument from nolan fans a million times before, Heath was so absorbed in the role of The Joker that he literally became him, so that's why he had to be put on sleeping medication which resulted in his death there for he should win he Oscar ::). And if he was so absorbed in his role then don't you find it strange that all of his co-stars said that he was always himself off camera.
Lots of actor's absorb themselfs in there roles other wise they wouldn't be very good actors. Heath's death was NOT a result of his role, lets not forget he had already finished with The Joker and was already into filming his new movie when he died. This whole Joker killed Heath BS came about from the stupid media trying to make money off his death and idiotic Nolanizes beileving it. Same goes with the Jack Nicholoson "i warned him" thing if anyone had payed enough attention they would have known that he warned him against the medication he was taking NOT the role of The Joker.
QuoteHis words were meaningful, intelligent, darkly humorous and utterly terrifying.
Im pretty sure you mean the Nolan brother's words were meaningful, intelligent, darkly humorous and utterly terrifying.
I have not said anywhere that the role killed him. I have said he was absolutely in character for the film. I say Ledger's dialogue is written a lot better and delivered a lot better. His laugh is pitch perfect.
Nothing personal sport, but i have heard that.....ALOT from many different Nolanites they figure it somehow make's Heath superior ::). And yes his laugh was pretty awesome.
I don't see how it makes his version superior either. He put his heart and soul into the film, and he died a while after that. His performance and death have nothing at all to do with each other.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Mon, 11 Aug 2008, 08:03
The Joker in modern comics does not behave the way Ledger's Joker did. That's not open to debate, it's fact. The comic book Joker has far greater resonance with Nicholson's portrayal. This too is fact. And like I said, my ego isn't at stake here. If a superior portrayal of the Joker comes along (which I think BTAS in large part is better) I'm ready, willing and able to label it as such... but Ledger's simply isn't. When it comes to live action, Nicholson's Joker is still top dog. His character is the Joker; Ledger's character was Hannibal Lecter in makeup. Ledger did a fantastic job and stole almost every scene he was in but he was the Joker pretty much in name only.
Why does Ledger?s Joker have to resemble the modern comic version? I don?t see the logic in how that makes Ledger any lesser of a portrayal.
This Joker is based off Batman #1, a timeless tale that represents a realistic film Joker for today, no matter what the current comic Joker may be.
Ledger was the Joker through and through, and stole every scene he appeared in. Personally, the superior Joker has come along, Nicholson is now second dog in the film stakes. Many agree with me as well.
They are black and white. The comic book could be said to be Nicholson, and as a result not as effective. Ledger in comparison could be said to be the graphic novel version. Ledger is chilling and true to the very roots of the character, while Nicholson is tame in comparison.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Fri, 15 Aug 2008, 09:54Why does Ledger?s Joker have to resemble the modern comic version? I don?t see the logic in how that makes Ledger any lesser of a portrayal.
He doesn't have to but with so much of the Nolan franchise's inspiration coming from comics published in the last twenty or so years, it's odd (but not in any way a dealbreaker) that Joker doesn't harmonize with them.
QuoteThis Joker is based off Batman #1
Superficially, yes. The problem is that the B#1 Joker played for profit. He had no problem sowing chaos if it would serve his penchant for murder and robbery, but he was not in any way out to chaos just for the fun of it. He played for profit and to settle personal grudges.
QuoteLedger was the Joker through and through, and stole every scene he appeared in. Personally, the superior Joker has come along, Nicholson is now second dog in the film stakes. Many agree with me as well.
Many people also loved Talladega Nights.
QuoteThe comic book could be said to be Nicholson, and as a result not as effective. Ledger in comparison could be said to be the graphic novel version.
? ? ?
shake en bake em!
I want it noticed for posterity that the two "Nolanites" (for lack of a better term) started the comparison to Jack Nicholson, not the "Burtonites."
To bring Nicholson into the discussion was unnecessary. And it was the people who were anti-Nicholson who did it.
If you guys think Ledger's performance is so great, than it doesn't need defending. Trying to argue that someone else's opinion is wrong is f***ing retarded. This isn't Superherohype. And Ledger being better IS just your opinion, don't delude yourselves. No matter what you argue, it won't make you right.
Now, keep in mind, I'm not painting you guys the enemy (not trying to, anyway), but the extra hostility in this discussion was brought on because of you. INDEPENDANT of which Joker might be better, Ledger still doesn't deserve the Oscar. Was the performance as great as you guys feel it to be? I agree. But will it win? Nope.
People were just as impressed with Spider-Man 2 or Superman: The Movie, and they were snubbed at the Oscars. If Ledger gets one, it will be because of outside pressure. Regardless of whether the fanboys like TDK more than they did SM2 or STM ("But TDK is so much better than those!" doesn't hold up), the Academy views them all the same. To the academy, it's "comic book movie = not real art." And TDK isn't good enough to change that. Great critical and financial success doesn't change the truth of the matter.
And in my opinion, Ledger was just doing what any good actor does. The only other Batman-related performance I find comparable to it is Keaton's Batman, as Keaton's transformation is very much equatable to Ledger's transformantion. It's unfortunate that Ledger has passed, and his performance was very electrifying, astounding and all those other things..... but he was still just an actor. A great actor. If he was going to get an Oscar, it would have been over something like Brokeback Mountain. This performance of his is not up to Oscar standards. No performance in the Batman film series is.
I find the hostillity directed toward people who disagree with you (although, thecolorsblend is being hostile in return) is childish and doesn't belong here. That's behavior for SuperHeroHype. Not here. Although I agree with thecolorsblend's arguments, the hostility still needs to stop, and you're not helping, colors.
And I also feel compelled to add that this over-the-top fonboyish love for TDK at the expense of appreciation of any other interpretation is souring my appreciation for TDK. Looks like I have to abandon ANOTHER forum because of this petty rivalry.
I don't want to be driven to hate TDK as I was BB. Not gonna happen. I'm outta here. I've said before that the two factions cannot exist in peace, and I've always believed it. Frankly, I find the "love Nolan at the expense of other interpretations" behavior sickening. And although it doesn't happen here (for now), I also can't stand the "Our movie of choice is better!" egotisim bullsh*t that most Nolanites pull. And then Burtonites get slammed for defending their prefurred films. Many Nolanites can't seem to believe that people could disgaree with them, and therefore become bigots. But in turn, I can't stand the rare Burtonite who tries to give it back to the Nolanites, the person who the Nolanites in-turn stereotype all Burtonites to be. With the exception of thecolorsblend, I can't think of any "Burtonites" who didn't enjoy TDK. But I'd be willing to bet that isn't what many Nolanites would be willing to believe.
The user "The Dark Knight" here isn't one of these "Nolanite" scum-suckers (although bringing a comparison of Jokers into this conversation was completely unnecessary and childish, it's something that just about every Nolanite does), but I'm leaving because eventually, the scummy ones WILL show up. I'm sick of feeling that I have to defend my right to prefer another director's interpretation, and there's too much of it starting around here already.
This is something that will never end in the Batman fanbase, because of the nature of the character. He will never stop having different interpretations.
It happens at Superherohype all the damned time and it's why I left. Nolanites can't discuss how much they loved the new stuff without bringing in the old stuff to say how inferior it is. ::) I don't care what anybody thinks. As an observer, I've seen endless times that the problem people in the fanbase are the Nolanites. Not every one of them, but easily 95% of them. If they didn't compare, there'd be no fighting. There wouldn't be the few Burtonites who bash in return if there was no comparison. Blame whoever you want, but the truth is that it all started with the Nolanites. They drew the battle lines. And they keep it going by trying to point the finger at Burtonites, then turning around and shoving their egos down everyone's throats.
As for where I fall, I'm a Batmanite, dammit I loved B89 and I loved TDK. But if prefurring Burton's movies makes me some kind of idiot that likes the wrong movie and makes me a "Burtonite, not a Batmanite" than so be it. I'm an enemy of the fanbase.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Fri, 15 Aug 2008, 09:54Nicholson is tame.....
wow, never heard anyone say that before!
Doc is right. I seems that every few weeks, someone is having to step in and say "enough is enough" with the slagging.
I swear to feck, I may have to install an "In My Opinion" button! The best thing to do is lock this thread, casue it's going nowhere now.