Ledger Ultimate Joker?

[DerMann]

Here's a quick question: If a future Batman movie is released would you prefer it to have "No Joker" or a "New Joker" portrayed by a different actor as part of the storyline.

I'm voting for "No Joker" since anything after Ledger would seem certain to disappoint especially when there are so many excellent Batman villians they could choose instead.

 

[The Mike]

Joker is a character that is timeless played by many different actors and will continue to be played by different actors far past Ledger. As for the next Batman film, I want Nolan to continue his progression which I feel includes more than just The Joker and the inclusions of a few more of Batman's Rogues. Even if Ledger were alive I would want him to continue without the Joker. His presence was felt, his mark made, his history written, there are plenty more lunatics for Batman to face.

 

[RJMacReady16]

Joker's too important to die with Ledger.

He was great and all, and I hate it for the dude, but we at least need a cameo in pt.3

The next Joker wouldn't have to mimic Ledger, either. He could very well be portrayed differently (to an extent), as he's been sitting in Arkham a while, and regardless of him f#$%ing up Dent, Batman beat him, which very well could've made him a little crazy.

Crazier.

 

[CelticPredator]

I think thats a horrid idea. I never want to see LEDGER's Joker on film ever again.

However, if they ever do a NEW Batman series, i'd be all over a new take on the character.

 

[OSCORP]

IMO

The character is too important. It would be stupid not to see Joker again. And there's TONS of good actors out there that could do just as good a job as Heath. You kids need to take him off the pedestal you've put him on, he did a damn good job as the Joker but that's all it was...a job.(not the best acting performance eva!) And other good actors should be able to attempt to play him even in the next one. (if thats the route they go)

 

[Buttmunch]

Everyone thought Jack's Joker was untopable but they were wrong. Same goes for Ledger's Joker. He is the best there is now, but I bet in 20 years or so we'll get something even better. Its inevitable.

 

[Ktjn]

Everyone thought Jack's Joker was untopable but they were wrong. Same goes for Ledger's Joker. He is the best there is now, but I bet in 20 years or so we'll get something even better. Its inevitable.

20 years, heh, sooner then that.

 

[CelticPredator]

IMO

The character is too important. It would be stupid not to see Joker again. And there's TONS of good actors out there that could do just as good a job as Heath. You kids need to take him off the pedestal you've put him on, he did a damn good job as the Joker but that's all it was...a job.(not the best acting performance eva!) And other good actors should be able to attempt to play him even in the next one. (if thats the route they go)

But then you get the impression effect. Which is an actor, acting like another actor, and since everyone loves the character, the actor might change it, which would suck.

It would be stupid to see this Joker again.

but it would be fun to see any other incarnation of The Joker.

 

[Kabukiman]

Look at Cesar Romero, Jack Nicelson, Mark Hamill, Heath Ledger, and the various fan films, not to mention the interpretation from "The Batman" and you'll see there is no such thing as an "ultimate" Joker.

 

[CelticPredator]

Yep. Oh and I was totally about to watch SGT Kabukiman on Sci Fi, but my DVR crapped out on me...dammit.

 

[Kabukiman]

Yep. Oh and I was totally about to watch SGT Kabukiman on Sci Fi, but my DVR crapped out on me...dammit.

Fix the dvr, you must see it! Dave would say you dodged a bullet though.

 

[hairlesswookiee]

sure we could have the Joker in the future. in part three, no. because everyone and their mother would compare whoever it is to Ledger and complain that they should've left it alone. i'd prefer another villain with a small hint to the Joker like maybe a reference by Alfred or Bruce that Arkham has its hands full and will never be the same now that he's there.

 

[CelticPredator]

Fix the dvr, you must see it! Dave would say you dodged a bullet though.

I watched the opening....I loled. The dude killed little kids, and through a woman out the window.

 

[scubasteve]

I'll go with what Charles Roven has said about this subject:

“We have to separate the actors from the role. On a personal level, Heath was a friend of mine. We had worked together before The Dark Knight, but I still think that The Dark Knight is its own thing, and we have to separate them."

 

[Cap'n Cook]

No Joker in the third. No cameo unless there is some unsued audio or video of Heath they can use somehow.

I magine there will be another incarnation, in another series of Batman films, but will not beat Ledgers. Sooo, yeh, he is the ultimate, for me at least.

 

[DerMann]

Jack's Joker was a bit "cartoony" (so were the Batman movies back then). I just think that there are other great villians they can use with these new Batman movies than rehashing a Joker that everyone will judge by Ledger's performance. I think a movie will start off with a strike against it even before most people see it. And what's worse is when you get another actor in that role trying to do his version of Ledger as the Joker. Maybe two movies down the road it would come off better but as previously posted due to the Joker's time in Arkham evolving the character but to immediately follow up the next Batman movie with the Joker is asking for trouble unless it is a cameo stuck together from unused film clips or a little CGI magic.

I know a few people didn't care for Ledger's version of the Joker, but the Dark Knight "era" was indeed a gloomy period for Batman and I think the performance by Ledger filled the role well.

But I would like to see other villians in the next Batman movie.

 

[man_vs_machine]

As of now Heath is the ultimate Joker in my eyes. But when i heard the news originally that the guy from broke back mountain was being cast as the Joker,I was furious! Never been so glad to be wrong about something. I agree with the people who think there are plenty of top rogues left in the gallery to fill out part 3 without having to have the joker again.

 

[The Mike]

I really don't get the "character is too important" argument. While The Joker is Batman's arch enemy he really no more important in the grand scheme of things, he is just a bridge to a greater world where Batman's foe are going to adopt his flare for the theatrics that is all. He isn't needed in the third film and from what Goyer said his role in the original draft of the third was just a cameoesque thing anyway. He is a lesson learned, a task completed and that's it. Beside the overarching villain in both films has been the Mob and its stranglehold on Gotham City, all three major villains (Ras, Scarecrow and The Joker) were product of this plaque with the first using it as an extention and the other two being embedded into it. Even Two-Face was a product of this Mob War. Its time to move on in the series and leave the Joker behind. There are plenty of villains to continue forward and continue the fight against the Mob.

 

[Nocturne]

I'm not a fan of the thought of re-casting, more just because it's jarring to see a different person in the role than due to having Ledger on a Pedastal.

But if they did there's no reason for it even to be played the same way, if anyone else has read Arkham Asylum they said the Joker may suffer from a form of Super Sanity where he re-invents himself each day to suit his own needs.

Now that he's been captured he would be analyzed so it's something they could bring into play.

 

[CelticPredator]

Let me put it this way. I never ever ever ever ever want to see THIS Joker...

Ever again on film. Once TDK is done, there will be another Batman series. Maybe one more comicy and stylish....Frank Miller's take or some crap like that, then i'm ALL up for another Joker take. But as for Nolans TDK Joker...no. Never ever. He died with Heath.