A lot of people say that Ledger's Joker was more "evil", and more "random" than Nicholson's, but I strongly disagree.
-
clyons — 9 years ago(October 18, 2016 01:09 PM)
Sure he could. The hard part to believe is that he can get all these guys to follow him, when he's killing them right and left (but that's also true of Nicholson's Joker, who summarily executes one of his most loyal followers, in public, for no reason).
But once he's got the people, and the dynamite, and the gasoline, he can just riff. Like he didn't know he was going to say "I'm going to kill people until Batman gives himself up" until he did it. He said "Kill The Batman!" then he decided he never wanted to kill Batman, because he's too much fun.
I think most of what he did, he didn't know he was going to do it until a day or two before he did, at most. Sometimes mere hours. His basic plan was there from the start, but it was almost infinitely adaptable.
Now the plan in the next Nolan Batman movie was just flat-out stupid, and dependent on a whole lot of things happening just so, which was one of the reasons that movie isn't as good. -
TheFatDruidofNacyl — 9 years ago(October 18, 2016 01:11 PM)
We can both agree on the third movie. I am actually a fan of the first two Nolan batman movies, just don't like the third one.
Come visit my
http://theblackrosecastle.com -
clyons — 9 years ago(October 18, 2016 01:15 PM)
I liked Hathaway's Catwoman a lotbest one ever. I liked a lot of individual moments in the movie. But I think losing Ledger really knocked Nolan off-balance, and he made terrible choices for the final villains. Bane SUCKS.
-
TheFatDruidofNacyl — 9 years ago(October 18, 2016 01:17 PM)
Like Ledger's Joker, I did feel Hathaway's Catwoman did fit that universe well. Bane sucked, especially when he starts out as the master villain that takes down Batman to a love sick bodyguard. I could complain about other things but don't want to go on a rant.
Come visit my
http://theblackrosecastle.com -
TheFatDruidofNacyl — 9 years ago(October 18, 2016 11:25 AM)
I liked both versions because they brought a different style to fit the feel of each movie.
Come visit my
http://theblackrosecastle.com -
clyons — 9 years ago(October 18, 2016 11:41 AM)
I thought Nicholson was basically playing himselfas he did in most of his movies by that point in his career. Not his real self, but his public image, this general Jack Nicholson character he did in movie after movie, only more psychotic and with face paint in this one.
And that worked. I mean, he's the only actor people ever heard was cast to play The Joker and they all said "Of course!"
But that doesn't make him the best. Just the most obvious. -
clyons — 9 years ago(October 18, 2016 12:16 PM)
But that's my pointhe'd already played this character. Many times before. He'd done The Shining almost ten years earlier (and it's a much better scarier more powerful performance).
Ledger came up with his Joker from scratchso did Romero, so did Hamill (of course they only had to do the voice). If you ONLY listened to the audio you wouldn't know it was them, even if you knew their other work very well.
Whereas if you had no idea who played Joker in this movie, and you just listened to the soundtrack, you'd say "It's Jack!" He made no attempt to create a new voice. He's playing his standard psycho killer character, which isn't all that different really from his standard romantic comedy character.