Crazy fan theory about TDK's Joker

[The Laughing Fish]

This theory has been going around online for a couple of days. According to a certain fan theory, TDK's Joker is not the villain, but in fact the real hero of the movie. The arguments are that he is trying to clean up Gotham City, not trying to destroy it.

Source: http://moviepilot.com/posts/2015/08/30/the-hero-gotham-needed-heath-ledger-s-joker-might-not-have-been-the-villain-in-the-dark-knight-3508911?lt_source=external,manual,manual

In my opinion, this theory is complete nonsense, and it goes to show that whoever dreamed this up didn't pay attention to the film at all. I don't want to dwell on it too much right now so I'll just say this: anyone who thought that the criminals refusing to blow up the other boat was exactly what the Joker intended should just stop watching films altogether. Bloody hell.

[Dagenspear]

I agree.

God bless you! God bless everyone in your life!

[Edd Grayson]

Agreed too. Joker is not a hero, he can be really entertaining and even charismatic, but he will always be a villain in every sense of the word.

[thecolorsblend]

The way he frames his argument makes it hard to argue against him. The people the Joker killed were either scumbags or else symbols of corruption such as Commissioner Loeb, Rachel and others. It's fun to think about if nothing else.

[The Laughing Fish]

The way he frames his argument makes it hard to argue against him. The people the Joker killed were either scumbags or else symbols of corruption such as Commissioner Loeb, Rachel and others. It's fun to think about if nothing else.

But you can easily argue the same thing for the B89 Joker. It could be said that Nicholson's Joker was the hero of the film and he was far more successful than Batman in purging corruption because he shot a corrupt cop, took down organised crime bosses, dismantled the mob, and was trying to purge greedy people from society. But it would be incredibly foolish to say any of that because:

A) Joker is a mass-murdering psycho who is trying to poison the whole town to death, and;
B) his murdering of the innocent Waynes led to Bruce becoming Batman. Yes, the Joker might've fooled the idiotic public into thinking that he was innocent and Batman is the real menace during the TV broadcast, but the audience knows better. It would be too neglectful for anyone to overlook these facts.

It's the same thing with TDK's Joker. Yes, he murdered mobsters, but he also killed people like Rachel, who was still innocent regardless if she worked in a corrupt system. Let's face it, anyone who thinks the Joker would have wanted for Gotham City to restore peace in the end would have to be a moron, and completely missed the point of what he was trying to accomplish in his outrageous corruption of Harvey Dent.

Sorry for being a killjoy, but I can't stand it when people make brainless theories like in that blog.

[thecolorsblend]

But you can easily argue the same thing for the B89 Joker. It could be said that Nicholson's Joker was the hero of the film and he was far more successful than Batman in purging corruption because he shot a corrupt cop, took down organised crime bosses, dismantled the mob, and was trying to purge greedy people from society. But it would be incredibly foolish to say any of that because:

A) Joker is a mass-murdering psycho who is trying to poison the whole town to death, and;
B) his murdering of the innocent Waynes led to Bruce becoming Batman. Yes, the Joker might've fooled the idiotic public into thinking that he was innocent and Batman is the real menace during the TV broadcast, but the audience knows better. It would be too neglectful for anyone to overlook these facts.

It's the same thing with TDK's Joker. Yes, he murdered mobsters, but he also killed people like Rachel, who was still innocent regardless if she worked in a corrupt system. Let's face it, anyone who thinks the Joker would have wanted for Gotham City to restore peace in the end would have to be a moron, and completely missed the point of what he was trying to accomplish in his outrageous corruption of Harvey Dent.

Sorry for being a killjoy, but I can't stand it when people make brainless theories like in that blog.

We saw that Joker's beginnings. He started off as a mobster himself, got double-crossed and then sought revenge on his ex-boss. He wanted to take over Grissom's operations anyway. Killing Grissom was a means to an end.

He then whacked the other mob bosses (A) because they were loyal to Grissom and (B) they're competition either way. He then took over operating crime in the city under his own umbrella.

Meanwhile the Joker in TDK eliminated the mob bosses but made no effort to replace them himself. The very closest he came was saying "this city deserves a better class of criminal, and I'm gonna give it to them". He then puts a plan in motion designed to protect Batman's secret identity. So one so inclined could believe that he wanted Batman to be viewed by the city as a criminal even though he knew Batman was a hero. Batman's a better class of criminal than the mob bosses the Ledgeker was laying waste to.

The ambiguity behind the Ledgker's motivations and history are precisely what allow that silly theory to have some ring of logic. We know exactly what motivated Nicholson's Joker and nobody could credibly argue he was a hero at all, much less a better hero than the Batman.

[Dagenspear]

But you can easily argue the same thing for the B89 Joker. It could be said that Nicholson's Joker was the hero of the film and he was far more successful than Batman in purging corruption because he shot a corrupt cop, took down organised crime bosses, dismantled the mob, and was trying to purge greedy people from society. But it would be incredibly foolish to say any of that because:

A) Joker is a mass-murdering psycho who is trying to poison the whole town to death, and;
B) his murdering of the innocent Waynes led to Bruce becoming Batman. Yes, the Joker might've fooled the idiotic public into thinking that he was innocent and Batman is the real menace during the TV broadcast, but the audience knows better. It would be too neglectful for anyone to overlook these facts.

It's the same thing with TDK's Joker. Yes, he murdered mobsters, but he also killed people like Rachel, who was still innocent regardless if she worked in a corrupt system. Let's face it, anyone who thinks the Joker would have wanted for Gotham City to restore peace in the end would have to be a moron, and completely missed the point of what he was trying to accomplish in his outrageous corruption of Harvey Dent.

Sorry for being a killjoy, but I can't stand it when people make brainless theories like in that blog.

We saw that Joker's beginnings. He started off as a mobster himself, got double-crossed and then sought revenge on his ex-boss. He wanted to take over Grissom's operations anyway. Killing Grissom was a means to an end.

He then whacked the other mob bosses (A) because they were loyal to Grissom and (B) they're competition either way. He then took over operating crime in the city under his own umbrella.

Meanwhile the Joker in TDK eliminated the mob bosses but made no effort to replace them himself. The very closest he came was saying "this city deserves a better class of criminal, and I'm gonna give it to them". He then puts a plan in motion designed to protect Batman's secret identity. So one so inclined could believe that he wanted Batman to be viewed by the city as a criminal even though he knew Batman was a hero. Batman's a better class of criminal than the mob bosses the Ledgeker was laying waste to.

The ambiguity behind the Ledgker's motivations and history are precisely what allow that silly theory to have some ring of logic. We know exactly what motivated Nicholson's Joker and nobody could credibly argue he was a hero at all, much less a better hero than the Batman.

We know what motivated Ledgers Joker. He wanted chaos. He says that. He murderers an innocent woman and psychologically twists an emotionally broken man into madness. He tries to get ships of criminals and civilians to blow eachother up or he'll blow them both up. He doesn't try to make batman look like a criminal. He dresses civilians to look like his criminals. He's a clear bad guy.

God bless you! God bless everyone in your life!

[The Dark Knight]

I think Ledger put in a fine performance, but in terms of threat Bane was the more effective villain. He targeted the people head on whereas The Joker had specific targets. Let's look at Bane:

He hit the stock exchange and bankrupted Bruce Wayne.
He bashed Batman in combat and locked him up.
He cut Gotham off from the mainland and held it to ransom with a nuclear bomb.
He trapped all the police in the sewers and replaced them with his Blackgate prisoners and Tumblers.
Had the rich and powerful's killed, their property destroyed and others put on trial.

The Joker's masterpiece was Harvey Dent. Sure, people may have been worried. But the rest of his crimes didn't really affect the public at large. He kills a Batman imposter, sure. But really, those people had to expect risk in their behaviour. They did put a target on their back by taking up arms and going out at night.

I don't think people would care much if the mob was taken down, or Lau burned alive with all the cash. And yes, Joker blows up a hospital. But he gives them plenty of time to evacuate, so he pretty much just destroys an empty building. Bane on the other hand destroyed a football field without warning, taking down many players.

The ferry incident is where The Joker first targets common people. But even then, he gave them the power to save themselves by killing the criminals. Bane, on the other hand, gave people effectively no hope at all. He's effectively goading people to take control of a city which is being patrolled by militia, and with a nuclear warhead driving around.

Good luck.

[Dagenspear]

I think Ledger put in a fine performance, but in terms of threat Bane was the more effective villain. He targeted the people head on whereas The Joker had specific targets. Let's look at Bane:

He hit the stock exchange and bankrupted Bruce Wayne.
He bashed Batman in combat and locked him up.
He cut Gotham off from the mainland and held it to ransom with a nuclear bomb.
He trapped all the police in the sewers and replaced them with his Blackgate prisoners and Tumblers.
Had the rich and powerful's killed, their property destroyed and others put on trial.

The Joker's masterpiece was Harvey Dent. Sure, people may have been worried. But the rest of his crimes didn't really affect the public at large. He kills a Batman imposter, sure. But really, those people had to expect risk in their behaviour. They did put a target on their back by taking up arms and going out at night.

I don't think people would care much if the mob was taken down, or Lau burned alive with all the cash. And yes, Joker blows up a hospital. But he gives them plenty of time to evacuate, so he pretty much just destroys an empty building. Bane on the other hand destroyed a football field without warning, taking down many players.

The ferry incident is where The Joker first targets common people. But even then, he gave them the power to save themselves by killing the criminals. Bane, on the other hand, gave people effectively no hope at all. He's effectively goading people to take control of a city which is being patrolled by militia, and with a nuclear warhead driving around.

Good luck.

The joker's threat status isn't what the issue is. He's a bad guy. He was gonna blow them both up if one didn't choose. He makes the innocent people look like the criminals.

God bless you! God bless everyone in your life!

[thecolorsblend]

We know what motivated Ledgers Joker.

We do? Excellent! I must have missed it so please tell me his real name, how he truly got those scars, how he knew his way around the security at the mob bank and also how he hired the bank team at the beginning of the movie.

He wanted chaos.

[/quote]Oh, sorry, I thought you meant he was developed the exact same way that Jack Napier was. So basically we don't know 1/16th as much about the Ledgker as we do about Napier. Got it.