its funny when people say they didnt like burtons penguin but they will wholeheartedly accept ledgers totally messed up inaccurate joker with the ugly smile scar, no class, long greasy hair who had no jokes or sense of humour and licked his lips etc. i find that strange. i dont even see much of a difference between the 2. if you liked ledgers joker you'd probably like devito's dark demented totally unique penguin as opposed to the silly comics version. before burtons interpreation, penguin of the comics was still alot like the burgess meredith version. all the penguins since burton however seemed to make the character much uglier/darker, more monsterous, which is a good thing. burtons penguin had depth. nolans joker was no different then that jigsaw guy from saw. just dumb.
likeing ledgers joker for most has become something of a popularity contest in my eyes. i go with the classics and what touches me personally, not with whats popular at the moment. i honestly dont see whats so great about ledger. people complain about burtons penguin but somehow accept nolans total idiosyncratic messed up joker that is nothing like the comics? im confused. are batman fans that starved for new material they will accept anything new, whether its anything like the comics or not? why do i get the feeling if NOLAN made penguin a dark pale fish eating child killer, he'd get a free pass while anyone in the "older films" gets bashed today in order so fannerds can praise nolan and whats popular? its just unfair bashing, simple as that. not trying to start an argumnent here, but i just see this trend and it kinda upsets me. i just prefer the older batman films, it suits my taste more while the new ones do nothing for me.