Heath Ledgers Joker

[The Dark Knight]

Getting petty now are we? The following is a definition of good: Satisfactory in quality, quantity, or degree. Honorable or worthy.
Very much the musical scores for Returns and Batman (1989), and The Dark Knight as a film.

[Azrael]

Well, I'm sorry if I appeared as petty, no matter what I say I have a positive "it's only movies" attitude, and I never have a perception about people depending on their tastes in film, music or art.

Our point of view and our taste usually defines what is "good" or "bad" (in pieces of art and entertainment), which is a very subjective factor. Many films meet the definition of good you give. E.g. The Rock (1996) is an excellent film this way, and not a sub-par actioner that happens to have excellent production values, stirring music and a nice paycheque for Sean Connery.

[The Dark Knight]

no matter what I say I have a positive "it's only movies" attitude

Batman is a large ammount of my life, so that may be a factor.

[BurtonBatman]

"Turning them on the ear" is one thing.  Throwing them out, creating new characters and slapping existing names on them is quite another.

But isn't this exactly what Tim Burton did in BR?

On another note, I saw influences from Batman #1 and TKJ in Ledger's performance.  The Joker is more serious than funny in Batman #1, and The Joker's insanity was captured very well from TKJ.  Aside from Ledger's appearance, I felt he captured the character very well. 

[thecolorsblend]

But isn't this exactly what Tim Burton did in BR?

The Penguin had NO character prior to Burton showing up.  So he took a few details from the comics (intellect, running for mayor/penchant for high society, etc) and otherwise reimagined the character because none existed previously... and that only because the studio demanded Penguin be included in the movie.  The arms dealer or night club owner versions of the character were still years away.

The Joker, by contrast, is probably the most well developed character in all of Batman's rogue's gallery.  There was never any need to change the fundamental nature of who he is.

[The Dark Knight]

In my opinion, it is about variety. Just like they?ve had him as the red hood, a gangster (and the killer of Batman's parents) and failed comedian. Here, he comes out of nowhere and we don?t know who he is. His face is smeared with white makeup, hair dyed green, and his smile is cut. Joker trademarks but done differently.

Getting the same old thing each time gets boring after a while. Sure, it is a winning formula, but still doesn't change the fact that it can get repetitive. Here, they've shaken it up and still remained faithful. It?s a little twist and I like it.

Just like mixing it up with Harvey Dent. Instead of having acid thrown at him in a courtroom, Dent attempts to free himself from his chair surrounded by gasoline barrels, but accidentally immerses the left side of his face in petrol when he falls on the floor. Batman arrives and rescues Dent just as the building explodes; the left side of Harvey's face is badly burned during the explosion. I wasn't expecting that, and loved it. He still has the burnt face, coin and multi-tone suit, just the lead up to these things is different. The Joker took things and turned them upside down. His greatest work was taking Dent and transforming him from White Knight to villain.

Dent becoming a murderous vigilante, rather than an outright criminal as in the comics was done to emphasize the differences and parallels between him and Batman. Also, I've got to say, compared to Tommy Lee Jones's incarnation in 1995's Batman Forever - who looked like he fell into a vat of pink lipstick - Eckhart's charred Two-Face is jarringly grotesque.

[Sandman]

The Dark Kight i agree with pretty much everything you said there. Although i was kinda dissapointed with The Joker, Two-Face made for it, i thought Harvey Dent would just end up another basic comicbook movie villian but i was wrong IMO he should be given just as much praise as The Joker gets.

Dent becoming a murderous vigilante, rather than an outright criminal as in the comics was done to emphasize the differences and parallels between him and Batman. Also, I've got to say, compared to Tommy Lee Jones's incarnation in 1995's Batman Forever - who looked like he fell into a vat of pink lipstick

To true it's a shame though cause Tommy Lee Jones could have done such a good job.

[thecolorsblend]

Just like mixing it up with Harvey Dent. Instead of having acid thrown at him in a courtroom, Dent attempts to free himself from his chair surrounded by gasoline barrels, but accidentally immerses the left side of his face in petrol when he falls on the floor. Batman arrives and rescues Dent just as the building explodes; the left side of Harvey's face is badly burned during the explosion. I wasn't expecting that, and loved it. He still has the burnt face, coin and multi-tone suit, just the lead up to these things is different.

I personally think it would've been hard to bring the pure comics Two Face origin to the screen in a believable way (although the thug pulling a gun on Dent during Maroni's trial made for a nice wink to the comics, imho).  Nolan found his own way to bring Two Face out of Harvey and it works.

The Joker took things and turned them upside down. His greatest work was taking Dent and transforming him from White Knight to villain.

The "Joker as corruptor" angle seemed very TKJ'ish to me.  I loved that part of it.  It sort of plays on the title of the movie and kinda makes you wonder if "dark knight" (fan associations notwithstanding) was actually referring to Harvey rather than Batman.  There's some ambiguity there and I dig it.

Dent becoming a murderous vigilante, rather than an outright criminal as in the comics was done to emphasize the differences and parallels between him and Batman.

Right, although Two Face doing such a thing has some precedent in the comics (killing Falcone in TLH, for example).  I don't think the transition from Harvey to Two Face went as smoothly as it could've in a perfect world but given the weight of the narrative Nolan was working with, I think it turned out pretty well.  For damn sure it's better than Schumacher's Two Face In Name Only.

Also, I've got to say, compared to Tommy Lee Jones's incarnation in 1995's Batman Forever - who looked like he fell into a vat of pink lipstick - Eckhart's charred Two-Face is jarringly grotesque.

Agreed.  For one thing, Eckhart actually looked like Two Face.

[The Dark Knight]

Yep, I'm with you guys here. I've got a massive post on Two Face, a character that I enjoyed in The Dark Knight.

Bruce Wayne saw Harvey Dent as his heir, which comes back to the theme of him realizing that being Batman will be a lifelong mission, and the tragedy that follows when Dent is corrupted.

Batman finds Gordon and his family with Dent at the building where Rachel died. Dent blames Gordon for the corrupt cops in his unit that he warned him about. For this, Dent kidnapped Gordon's family in order to make Gordon suffer the same way he did after losing Rachel, by flipping his coin to see which family members will die.

Batman convinces Dent to judge him for not saving Rachel. Harvey's coin lands on tails, and he shoots Batman. Dent focuses his attention back to Gordon's son, and flips the coin again. Before he can determine the boy's fate, Batman tackles him over the side of the building. Dent falls to his apparent death, and Batman saves Gordon's son.

That's right, Two Face dies. I can hear you now, saying that this is a colossal wasted opportunity no matter how well done it is. Well, if he is indeed dead, you are wrong. This character will leave an everlasting influence on the audience, possibly more so than he would if he were left alive.

Two Face?s death is the climatic moment of the entire film and the completion of the film?s narrative; not a ploy by Nolan to wash his hands of a sequel. The move is bold, and makes great sense in how the story progresses.

Dent?s death changes everything for Gotham and Batman. The legacy of Batman has never relied on plain, black and white characters. Batman isn?t endowed with super powers, and is presented as a complex and multi-levelled character. Like real life, he doesn?t always win the fight. Batman selflessly decides to take the blame for Two Face?s deeds in order to preserve Dent?s original legacy as Gotham?s redeemer.

As Batman flees the encroaching police, Gordon explains to his son that Batman is the hero Gotham deserves, but not the hero it needs right now. He is more than a hero, he is the silent guardian. He is the Dark Knight. This dialogue reveals that the title of the film hinges on Harvey?s death and the subsequent cover up of the truth about it, with Dent being the White Knight in the eyes on the public.

To those still sceptical of this move, think of it this way. Two-Face isn?t anywhere near as interesting after his origin arc as he is before it. After his origin, Two-Face plateaus, since the origin effectively addresses pretty much everything about the character. I was apathetic about him driving a third film for that reason. What can you do with Two Face in a third, besides retreading elements that were already in the original arc to begin with? Ending it right after the origin story creates a very solid curve for the character.

This new spin also creates a false legacy for the character, becoming a mythical proportion in the eyes of Gothamites, when he in fact ended as a rotten criminal. Gotham City is damaged goods, so it makes sense for its idol to be as well. Adding more depth to this, Dent himself ominously says earlier in the film, "You either die a hero, or live long enough to become a villain."

Even if not dead, it is doubtful we will see Two Face again, and he may as well be dead. In the novelisation it says he broke his neck in the fall. Dent would be locked away in Arkham Asylum, hidden from the public to hide the truth of his madness and crimes as to keep his reputation as Gotham?s saviour intact. He wouldn?t be escaping from jail or be seen in public any time soon, if ever. He?d be wheelchair bound and wouldn?t posses much, or any threat anyway.

It is possible, as the film does not definitely answer the question. We do not see what happens in between Batman escaping the police from Dent?s body and the City wake, not funeral. In any case, in the eyes of the people of Gotham, Harvey Dent died in the hospital explosion.

This affair will be a major scar on Batman?s already unstable reputation ? it?ll be very hard indeed to get that back without revealing the true nature of Dent. I don?t like comic book movies killing off major villains, but this is the exception. This is done extremely well and with fine calculation. It?s not a simple, pointless throwaway moment. Two Face, who already was a tragic character, has become even more so. To say this, I think is a testament to how well Nolan utilizes him.

Symbolically, Dent is dead and Two Face is all that remains.

[thecolorsblend]

Has there been any word on who the villain will be in the third one?  Like you, I can't see Two Face being that interesting a second time around.  Ditto Joker (particularly after Ledger's passing).  The Scarecrow has pretty much run his course.

Who's it gonna be?