Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilmase1153
But thats what makes the joker soo disturbing, its what makes him, well him...
Nolan nailed it imo..
|
Not that Ledger's rendition of the character wasn't excellent -- he really was a great demented, dark Joker -- I've always been a fan of Nicholson's rendition of the character; man, he just plays that off-the-wall Joker so well...but there were two different takes here: Burton's campy, cartoonish, fantasy kind of Joker and Nolan's dark, more sinister, mysterious Joker. Both worked effectively -- I just wish there had been more of a real backstory to go by because I always "bought" Burton's vision as the "real" deal and being authentic to the source materials; of course, as years pass and we get stuff like "Batman Begins," we are exposed to a possible different take on the events and characters -- I think most of the world took Burton's vision as the "right" one because there were no other elements to compare. Perhaps diehard Batman comic fans knew the difference but then Nolan came along and offered this different perspective and we're never really left knowing what the Joker was really about...
The end of Batman Begins suggests the Joker was already coming into the picture -- he leaves the card that Gordon found. But what of this? I mean, was he already plotting robberies and crime while Bruce was dealing with Scarecrow and Ducard? He was already in Gotham? As I said, Burton takes the perspective and angle that this criminal named "Jack Napier" was working for Carl Grissom and got set up at the Axis Chemicals plant where Batman dropped him into the vat...but in Nolan's vision, was Joker already romping around Gotham, no previous "story" to speak of?
Just some differences I ponder between the two visions...