The Dark Knight vs Batman '89 | Thread profile

It's probably been discussed already but this is my take on the issue. I personnaly preferred Tim Burton's "Batman". And especially his "over-the top" Joker, as played by Jack Nicholson. I saw "The Dark Knight", and I would rate it 3 out of four stars. Ledger was good. In fact all three live action "Jokers" retained elements of the various portrayals of the comic-book villain. But ...

eugene are you a comic reader or just like what you've seen in the movies... I think the best tellings of the Joker have been The animated series (if they didn't have to keep using gas because of it being saturday morning) and now TDK. The Joker is only funny to himself and a few others... He isn't a showman that's more the Riddler's stick. Jack played Jack in make-up and in a ...

I don't think so daywalk I read the comics and i think visually and character wise the joker is more like Jacks. In this film he was more of a concept of anarchy "really british concept" instead of a homicidal insane clown. And he is a showman, read arkham asylum, killing joke, he's very showman like in those. On the other hand he can be on occasion a complete nut and forget about his ...

I understand your points I don't agree especially using the killing joke as a reference I see him far more interested in terror anarchy and chaos. Why taunt Gordon with the brutal shooting and the pics of Barbera? He was taking out the keepers of the order Gordon and Batman wanting Bat's to kill him at the end similarly to Joker wanting Batman to kill him in TDK to break his one rule....

Both movies could be considered "true to the comics". This story has been around almost sixty years. You have different eras of Batman in the comics. So either could have been in a way, "true to the comics" at some era. I like both TDK and Batman 89. I think Batman 89 focuses more on Batman's balance between Bruce Wayne/Batman. TDK focuses more on Bruce Wayne being consumed by ...

Nicholson's portrayal as The Joker was his worst performance, ever. He simply acted as himself. He made the Joker a mobster. Ledger made The Joker a psychopath. Both are correct intepretations of the character, depending on which comic book you read.

Nicholson's Joker was more powerful than Ledger's interpretation. He lead a crime syndicate whereas Ledger's Joker acted like a lone terrorist. ---- This signature has been deleted by an administrator

Exactly as I said. Nicholson's Joker was a mobster. Ledger's was a maniac. He acted alone for most of the film, with very few henchmen. He STOLE henchmen from established mobsters, and then turned them on their former bosses. Yet you think Nicholson's was more powerful?

Nicholson's Joker was more powerful than Ledger's interpretation. He lead a crime syndicate whereas Ledger's Joker acted like a lone terrorist. That doesn't really make either interpretation any better than the other. The Joker in the comics is a loner anyways, simply because he's too unpredictable for even his fellow supervillains to trust him. I looove this job!

Nicholson>Ledger. Porch Monkey 4 Life My only regret in life is that I'm not somebody else.