Discussion in 'Art & Culture' started by dsdsds, Jul 28, 2008.
1. Jack Nicholson 1989
2. Heath Ledger 2008
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
I think they are very different Jokers but I like Nicholson's best:
1. You ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
2. make art, until someone dies. See? I am the world's first fully-functioning, homicidal artist.
3. I've been dead once, already. It's very liberating. You should think of it as therapy.
4. Wait'll they get a load of me.
5. Gentlemen, let's broaden our minds!
6. Can somebody tell me what kind of a world we live in where a man dressed up like a bat gets all of my press.
7. I was in the bath one day, when I realized why I was destined for greatness.
8. Jack is dead my friend. You can call me, Joker. And, as you can see, I'm a lot happier.
9. You know, Gordo and I were discussing the pros and cons of winged vigilantes. What's your stance?
10. This town needs an enema!
11. Where does he get those wonderful toys?
Jack Nicholson , he was a real actor.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I'm not sure the question is fair because the two actors were being tasked with portraying very different characters.
Nicholson's Joker is intentionally cartoonish. He is not presented as a nihilistic socio-path the way Ledger's is.
True, maybe a fairer question woud be "which one do you like more?" or (probably a different poll) - Which one is more representative of the "real" joker. I'm not a comic book fan, but I'd love to see a debate on which one is closer to the original.
Any links to the original comic books?
The character has appeared in numerous Batman related media; portrayed by Cesar Romero in the 1960s Batman television series; Jack Nicholson in the 1989 film Batman (Nicholson's version of the Joker ranks #45 in the American Film Institute's list of the top 50 film villains).
He began as a homicidal foil to Batman in the 1940s, then transformed into a goofy and mischievous prankster in the 1950s and '60s, before finally reverting back to his original murderous and maniacal form in the 1970s. Throughout his years as one of the most iconic and recognizable villains in pop culture, Batman's greatest nemesis has also underwent some significant changes in appearance, a visual evolution that includes a variety of different artistic interpretations of the character.
Heath Ledger wasn't?
The first 2 Batmans sucked giant elephant dicks, including Jack's performance. Comnpletely stupid, but he got extremely rich because he got a %....
After appearing in television roles during the 1990s, Ledger developed a movie career, appearing in nearly 20 films.
So 20 films makes him a great actor?
There's been lots of different variations of the Joker throughout the years, authenticity isn't something you can measure the performances by. I prefer Ledger because this is a guy who can scare the shit out of you, like I think the Joker should do. Nicholson's could too, but not like Ledger. This was someone who thrived on depriving you of hope, torturing you, someone who had no rules and didn't care. Nicholson's was nothing but a glorified mobster. Ledger's was a force of nature.
Of course, that's not to fault either of the two's acting abilities. A lot of their strength came from the script, and what the director wanted to see.
You liked the Joel Schumaker versions? Huh?
Different strokes I guess.
You implied that Heath Ledger wasn't a 'real' actor, whatever that is.
Having been nominated for an Academy Award in the best actor category wouldn't he qualify as a 'real' actor?
I havn't seen the new flick.
I thought, though, that the Joker killed wayne's parents and thus created Batman. How could Ledger do that when hae looks/seems younger (or the same age as) the dude play'n Batman?
Oh well, I'm sure it's great.
That was something made up for Burton's Batman movie. Is definitely not a part of the Batman mythos.
The Jokers really were two different characters. Jack's was a crime boss turned supervillain while Heath's was more of a lone terrorist super villain, like a tough Al Quaida operative. You can't really compare the two.
I will say that I recognized Jack as Jack when he played the Joker. I don't think he can help but play part of himself in his roles. I did not recognize anything of Heath Ledger in his Joker role. Heath was just nowhere to be found. I would never have known it was him if it wasn't advertised. If acting is to be judged by an actor's ability to appear to be someone else I'd say Heath won this round, although it may have been the phyrric victory which eventually did him in. I hear he was into method acting which can mess actors up sometimes.
I agree Ledger's Joker "scared the shit out of you" BUT Nicholson's Joker was FUNNY and Charismatically repulsive. We are talking about a JOKER after all. I think Ledger's performance was great and the character contributed greatly to the success of the plot, but I don't neccessarily approve of the portrail of the Joker. It could have or should have been some other villain.
I'm a huge Jack fan, but Ledger's joker blew him away.
I prefer the character greatly, plus I agree with desi completely about his ability to wholly disappear in the character.
When did I say that? Generally I don't like superhero movies because of the sheer idiocy. But the last Batman was actually almost believable...
Nicholsens' Joker was very entertaining, but Ledgers' performance was simply fascinating. His everymovement, vocal inflection, and facial tick seemed entirely unrehearsed, as though he was a real person living and breathing on screen. The Dark Knight script could only have worked if the audience believed that every single person in Gotham city, even the criminals and mobsters, was scared of him. The only way that could happen is if it didn't seem as though the Joker was simply actor playing a character, and that certaintly wasn't the case, and this is coming from someone who originally thought Ledger was a horrible choice for the part.
Separate names with a comma.