Heath Ledgers Joker

Started by Joker81, Sat, 12 Jul 2008, 21:05

Previous topic - Next topic
Sun, 1 Feb 2009, 11:21 #160 Last Edit: Tue, 10 Feb 2009, 03:46 by The Batman Returns
"So by the time I went to see it, it spoiled the experience for me as  I was completely not impressed at ALL by Heath's performance in terms of all the hoorah talk they made about him."

I'm one of those high schoolers who stick by the Burton films 100%.

"So by the time I went to see it, it spoiled the experience for me as  I was completely not impressed at ALL by Heath's performance in terms of all the hoorah talk they made about him."

I was pretty much like you.

"Also, him being dead sort of made it weird. Kind of like the Crow, Brandon Lee, expect I actually loved that film."

The praise Ledger got was & still is RIDICULOUS! He was good, but he's no Jack. I think he got all of this praise b/c of his death b/c most people were skeptical about his casting before his death. In order to cleanse themselves, those critics hail him.

"So I had to watch DK again on my computer this time and I pushed out any fanboy nonsense from my head."

Those fanboys are quite moronic!

"So, my opinion... He was good. Not charismatically good like Jack. But he played psycho really well. I was hoping for morrre psycho but it he did very well."

He played a brooding & cliched terrorist instead of the generic Joker, but he did it in a good manner.

"The problem....   It wasn't even about him so much as it was more focused on Harvey Two Face in terms of character developement.
I loved the attention they gave Harvey to the point I found myself wishing Joker wasn't in it, at least until part 3."

Harvey should've been introduced in Begins, like he was supposed to, but Rachel Turds took his place (damn you Dawes & Katie Holmes). Seeing as how she didn't add anything to the plot, Dent was needed. In TDK, he should've became Two-Face in the middle act of the film. Now as for the Joker, he wasn't needed. Why? Nolan has said that he wanted to use rogues who haven't been in a film yet. Dent is an exception b/c he was portrayed boringly by Billy Dee Williams in BATMAN, & was scripted in a campy manner in Batman Forever (Tommy Lee Jones was a MUCH BETTER choice). Nicholson played the Joker PERFECTLY, so there was no need for Ledger's Joker.

"It sucks Heath is gone. He did a really good job playing his version of Joker. Complete difference and appropriate for Batman in DK."

If only he had a better script.

"I wish I could say nicer things about that film but I felt it dragged too much and the last parts was waay too erratic. I felt sorry for Bale. lol."

I agree. Things like that whole love triangle were moronic. Bale needs to lose that growly voice & pick up the REAL Batman voice, like the voices of Michael Keaton & Kevin Conroy. Plus, that suit he wore looked RIDICULOUS! Apparently, the designers tried to make it look like armor, like the Returns batsuit, but it came out as too hi-tech. Plus, the cowl looks even more like an owl than a bat more than the Begins cowl.

Oh dont get me started on his suit. LOL... I hated his mask in DK. He looked like catman to me. Bale has a good chiseled jaw and they completely didnt take advantage of it and basically cut out a circle on his mask for his mouth to show and its weird looking. He needs different bat ears. They could have made a better mask.

Reeves666 just finished a cowl he named Inferno which I felt could have been sooo awesome for Bale.

I dont care much for his batsuit. I preferred his BB suit over the DK one.

(shhh... i secretly just don't like any of it) lol... :D
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Do you like eating in here?"   ...Oh yeah. .. ....   ... ... ...You know to tell you the truth, I don't think I've ever been in this room before.   
"hahaeheheh"  You want to get out of here?  "YES."

Quote from: The Batman Returns on Sun,  1 Feb  2009, 11:21I'm one of those high schoolers who stick by the Burton films 100%. I liked TDK, but I also like seeing it get bashed.
Hopefully you know my views about TDK by now.  Seems I've been using this disclaimer a lot lately.  But anyway, the bashing thereof needs to be done carefully.  Nolan made a film that genuinely honors Batman.  That's nothing like Joel Shlockmaker, who (intentionally or not) pissed all over the character and the fans.  No, while TDK has serious issues (the fact that so many people praise it as "brilliant, subtle filmmaking" tells me just how stupid we as a human race have gotten) it's still an enjoyable ride.  Fights, 'splosions, awesome moments (dragging Lao back to the States is pure Batman), everything you want in summer cinema, ya know?

In my opinion, we can criticize TDK as cinema and as a Batman adaptation (to some degree) but we can't bash Nolan in the same way I encourage bashing of Shlockmaker for his two abominations.

Quote from: Batnar on Sun,  1 Feb  2009, 10:53
This is going to sound odd or dumb (i'll accept either one) but Heath's joker performance was tarnished heavily by the young fans who for some reason (i discovered) were on a hate rage with Keaton and Jack Nicholson fans, all over the net, saying Heath was 100 times better than Jack, blah blah blah, mostly vulgar high schoolers. And it went as far as sites pulling out a comparison vote-off (which was dumb imho since they're two completely different takes in different times).


The good news is that those people go away the year after a Batman movie comes out. Everyone was a Riddler fan in 1995...and then the next year "everyone" was a Will Smith fan when Independence Day came out.

Quote from: phantom stranger on Sun,  1 Feb  2009, 22:53The good news is that those people go away the year after a Batman movie comes out. Everyone was a Riddler fan in 1995...and then the next year "everyone" was a Will Smith fan when Independence Day came out.

LOL, so true!

In a nutshell isn't Jack's Joker The Laughing Fish and Ledger's is Batman-#1? This is at least how I see things.

Quote from: batass4880 on Mon,  2 Feb  2009, 02:25
In a nutshell isn't Jack's Joker The Laughing Fish and Ledger's is Batman-#1? This is at least how I see things.

I think Jack is closer to Batman #1 than Ledger. The script for Ledger was that of a cliched terrorist.

Quote from: The Batman Returns on Mon,  2 Feb  2009, 02:28I think Jack is closer to Batman #1 than Ledger. The script for Ledger was that of a cliched terrorist.

I actually think (could be wrong) Ledger's was closer in story to #1 but not his motives. The Joker in #1 was out to get rich and get revenge with gangsters and a judge where as Ledger's was to just cause trouble without any logical explanation other than to "prove" all people are scum. But yeah, in other words it was a cliched terrorist story.

I say Jack's Joker is closer to Laughing Fish because of his dark and nihilistic humor. Also, he poisoned fish with Smylex in the comic book and Jack poisoned health and beauty products in the movie.

Also, the only thing I can see how Jack's Joker was like Batman-#1 (other than broadcasting his plans and Smylex killings that was also done in TLF) was the whole mob connection thing. The gangster story for the Joker in '89 was probably for sure from that comic.

I watched TDK again recently after a hiatus, and Ledger's performance really brings the film to another level. To the point that I don't know how the film would have fared without him. For what he was hired to do, he did it very well.