Messages

There is no maybe or maybe not. It is. Ledger one-upped Nicholson. Symbolically, Nicholson throws away fake money, Ledger burns real money.

I don't think anything in the movie actually says the cashmoneymoolah was fake.  It's in the comic adaptation and maybe the novelization but the movie suggests nothing more than legit cash.

In terms of enjoying the two Jokers, it is Ledger hands down for me. He locked himself in his room for a month and delivered a layered, fascinatingly dangerous performance.

Which wasn't anything to do with the comics.  There's simply no escaping that.

I noticed this the other night.  Forgive me if this angle has already been covered.  I watched B89 the other night because I'm becoming more obsessed with the Burton movies each year.  Anyway, here's what we've got.


This is taken from Detective Comics #27.  The villain (whose name escapes me) ends up falling into the acid below after getting punched in the face by Batman.  The similarities in this scene are obvious...




What's interesting though is that obviously the villain in #27 isn't the Joker.


In The Killing Joke, the Joker becomes the Joker after a dip in toxic waste.  However, it was by choice on his part.  A desperate choice but a choice nonetheless.  He chose to dive in.

Not only does this scene tie two comics references (The Killing Joke and general Joker mythology along with Detective #27 specifically) together into a single sequence though, it also heightens the already #27-heavy references in B89.  Detective #27 was always a blue print for the Axis Chemical shoot out in my mind but now it's completely inseparable.  I've always thought #27 was a big (and unsung) influence on the production but now you REALLY cannot separate from the Axis sequence/birth of the Joker stuff.

As I've seen more and more of Nicholson's performances outside of B89 like Witches of Eastwick, his Joker seems more and more like Jack with Joker make-up.

Correct.  In a sense, Jack was essentially hired to play himself, as the Joker in the comics is basically a more maniacal version of the Nicholson stereotype.  Not always and, arguably, not so much in the past 5+ years but the Joker of the 70's, 80's and a good bit of the 90's is well-represented by Nicholson.

Now I love Jack's Joker, but Ledger one-upped him.

In terms of immersing himself in the role, maybe, maybe not.  In terms of reflecting the comics, it's not even competitive.  Jack is *CLEARLY* the Joker from that era of the comics.  The best anybody can argue about Ledger is that he's the Joker from Batman #1... but even that's up for debate as that Joker was a killer and thief who played for profit.  He wasn't an anarchist, unless introducing a little anarchy would further his aims.  That Joker isn't likely to burn cash.  By contrast, the modern day Joker would as he certainly does enjoy a little anarchy but his demented sense of humor is utterly absent from TDK.  As a result, you end up with the worst of both of these two different Jokers in TDK.

Granted these things aren't Ledger's fault but in terms of purely enjoying one Joker over another, it's hands down Nicholson for me.

Nope, not clear at all.  Just curious about the criteria you use to judge who you think is worthy of an Oscar.  You said Ledger did not deserve one, but never said why you thought that.

Tons of actors "immerse themselves in the role".  Ledger didn't reinvent the wheel by doing that.

I am aware what the topic is. I was saying that if you compared the two Jokers, Ledger wipes the floor with Nicholson. As has been said, Nicholson was playing himself with makeup on.

That's who the Joker is and that's what Nicholson was hired to do.

Nicholson didn't deserve an Oscar or even talk of one then, and compared to Ledger's Joker, he most certainly doesn't now. It'd be sour grapes from the Nicholson/Burton crowd if Ledger got that Oscar, they couldn't stand it. It would officially label him better of the two.

You could give Ledger a gold medal in women's figure skating for all I care, it doesn't change my opinions about his performance.

A further nail in the coffin is that The Dark Knight is going to overtake Batman (1989) as the highest grossing Batman film (regardless of the inflation and adjusted box office). So take that!

I'm cool with that.  I don't need my opinions to be validated by the popular majority.  It was only ever going to be a matter of time until a Batman flick came along to do what TDK is poised to do.  Luckily my ego is not at stake here.  B89 is a better film than TDK.  So is BR.  I don't need the masses to agree with me in order to be right.  I am right and that's enough for me.

I would've thought by saying "Ledger's performance... doesn't merit an Oscar nomination", I would've made my views quite clear.

Also, the issue at hand (for some reason) is whether or not Ledger deserves an Oscar, not whether Nicholson deserved one.  While I don't remember what else came out in 1989, I venture that he didn't deserve an Oscar either.

I'll close by saying that if Ledger does somehow win an Oscar for TDK, it'll be entirely a sympathy vote... unless Oscar season REALLY sucks this year.

I'm quite sure one of the participants doesn't care either way.

Bringing this back on topic somewhat, I saw the movie again yesterday and while I still think highly of it, I maintain that Ledger's performance (while exceptional) doesn't merit an Oscar nomination.

It was never really resolved either, only dropped by one of the participants.

I didn't think this post deserved a thread all to itself.  Anywho, I saw it again tonight (the fourth time, for those who might be interested).  Obviously the movie's been out for a while now and I observed something interesting during tonight's rather packed showing.

When the movie first came out, I saw it at midnight and it went down a storm.  The audience just loved it.  They gasped in all the right places, laughed at all the right things, sat forward in their seats in anticipation during all the right moments, etc.  This held true in subsequent viewings as well and it was a treat watching it with a virgin audience.

Tonight?  There were smatterings of those things but in large part it was quiet as a tomb.

It hit me right about then that it was so quiet because most people in the audience had already seen the movie.  They were either bringing a friend with them to see it or else were watching it again just because they dig it.

You want to know why this movie's so successful?  Look no further.  Repeat business is basically the only way to describe this level of success.

[wade]

The production design is horrid, with large naked men dotting the landscape, decorated in neon colors.

To paraphrase a wiser man than myself- "you've got men wearing anatomically correct rubber costumes and gigantic codpieces chasing each other around statues of ornately designed naked men while bathed in neon light... yessir, you simply have to wade through the symbolism in this movie."

Still, I've got it paused right now with the commentary going.  Shlockmaker's basic ambitions ("make a FUN and LIGHT Batman, one that doesn't take itself too seriously") are admirable enough.  However, B&R's problem is that it's as much making fun of Batman with all that hammy dialogue and those overly elaborate sets as much as trying to deliver a rollercoaster action flick.  By logical extension then, it's making fun of the viewer for watching it.  It's hard not feel condescended to when you see John Glover, a normally fine actor, get pushed waaaaay over the top or Poison Ivy shriek "CURSES!!" like bad 80's cartoons.

Really, given the strength of Batman's live action legacy at this point, I think I can forgive B&R.  Alas, the same cannot be said of Superman Returns (which I've accepted that I'll simply never make peace with).

Yeesh, Two Face's bodycount is even more muddled than I thought.  The Nolans REALLY should've taken the time to elaborate a bit more on this.

Me, myself would be very jubious if Ledger won, not only for the sympothy vote, but because there has been an internet campaign by Nolanites and anti Nicholson and Burton fans for him to win the oscar since the first teaser trailer!!! Many months before the film was released.

I never understood the phenomenon myself.  Right from the start, the Nolanites were in a frenzy over a whoppin' two lines of dialogue from Ledger.

Its a fad.

Mass hysteria is more like it.