Heath Ledger or Jack Nicholson?

Heath Ledger or Jack Nicholson?

I think Nicholson's joker was much more respectful of the comic book. More outlandish, more exaggerated, more comedic.

Ledger tried to make the Joker scary. It's never what he was about it in the comic book.

Other urls found in this thread:

wired.com/story/batman-joker-villain/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

It's OK to improve on things.... The comics were cheesy as fuck.

You'd do much better at Sup Forums.

Yes, they were cheesy.

Oh really? I'm not a huge sucker for all of these super heros, but i've read one or two comics revolving around the joker. He was pretty damn scary in these, i don't know if he's a massive pussy in the batman comics, but i'd conclude he's a bad guy and bad guys should be scary,

different but slightly the same interpretations of the same source.
>both portray the joker as highly intelligent, original 1989 batman having backgrounds in chemistry.
>sometimes clumsy and taking hits
>clown like personality.

Imo Ledger's was more true to the comic. He just showed up and started killing people and doing stuff and they never shoehorned in a bit where batman finds out his true identity like they did in Batman 89 (in the comics the jokers real identity is never properly revealed)

I thought it was obvious that Christopher Nolan wasn't directing a comedy. The intensity of that trilogy is what drew me in.

It depends on which author wrote the depictions of Batman and the Joker. Contrary to popular belief, there has never been one single Joker.

jared leto

Didn't know that last bit

There is only one.

Underrated post.

Nicholson is far superior.

Ledger was one note.

Nicholson a best, easily.
Ledger do the job but Nolan can't do shit with a camera, never been able to bring any tension.

Both were good, but 89 was something special. Super hero movies were very rare cultural events back then and everyone went to see Batman. Even the soundtrack was a huge hit.

They make too many of them now and that ruins the magic, at least for me.

Now get off my fucking lawn.

Nicholson.

There's no comparison between the two characters. Ledger took the joker and made his own version. He did a good job but now it's created this cancerous cult around the joker

>the comic book.
which one?

Quads! Also speaks the truth. We're completely bombarded with superhero/comic book fliks now that 89 really was special.

damn straight

he didnt even shave his moustache off, just painted over it.

Ill just leave this here

wired.com/story/batman-joker-villain/

"My main goal was to undo the comic tropes while changing Gotham from a comic book city into a real city—a city dealing with everything from Black Lives Matter to the growing wage gap," Murphy says. "[But] rather than write a comic about the wage gap, I gave those ideas to the Joker, who leads a kind of media war against Gotham's elite by winning people over with his potent observations and rhetoric."

Now I hate it even more.

Jack is a character in every film and off set...

50s

Apples and oranges. Nicholson was a fantastic joker in the comedic, wacky sense of the 1960s movies. Ledger was a great dramatic, unhinged joker for the more recent movies.

Thats like asking if Christian Bale or Adam West was a better batman.

That was his main goal? How did he get past security let alone hired?

This

Thats fair. But who would you pick?

This.

Badass

soniamdissapoint.jpeg

I saw your Shigechi post in the BlazBlue thread on /vg/. That's kool.

>31 posts in before someone mentions Hamill

Bunch of fuckin plebs, I tell ya.

Audibly, there is no other. His voice is spot fucking on.

i loved the animati0on on that show

Can't spell Mark Hamill without Arkham

To be honest, I loved both, they both got the joker down pretty well imo. But if I had to choose, I'd say Jack. Jared Leto is the worst one out of all of them.