TheresNoSolution.com

the thing is about the two jokers is that nicholson's portrayal was at the beginning of the comic-book movie phenomenom, call it the sperm entering the egg stage if you want, so movie bosses were looking for a sell-able form of batman, one that people could get without having to slam through a book or two beforehand. while heath portrayed his version while everyone was used to the idea of the joker being this nicholson-owned character which was created for the mass-market, why else trust a dark comic book character to hollywood's dark son (tim burton)? while chris nolan went for the more dedicated comic book realism version, sticking to the joker's portrayal in the comic book as this guy on the edge, and over the course of the summer i saw both of burton's batman films and both of nolan's and i can safely say, ledger made me crap myself both times of seeing the film.

so basically, in my obscure argument, my point is both portrayal's were cutting-edge and pushing the wall of the box for their time, but nicholson's performance was mainstream while ledger's was more comic book and such.

eat my comic book printed shorts tns

Ledger. He was really convincing.

Well really I'm a big nerd when it comes to Batman, but really The new Batman portrays a whole lot darker Gotham, but Jack Nicholson played the original Joker with the original origins I believe, but He was more of a Joker that used a lot of gag weapons and Ledger palyed a darker Joker, but was still funny, I really think they both were good in there own Batman movies also







Mark Hammil rules as the Joker