| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Ali |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 12:23:08
So it's going to be slightly dark, I take it...
|
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ali |
Posted - 05/25/2007 : 06:48:37
Nicholson hardly ever adlibs. Most of The HJoker's dialogue was scripted, some even going back to the "legendary (read: wank" Sam Hamm draft.
|
| damalc |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 17:53:27
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
Good point. But Nicholson's Joker had a lot of fun, was frequently very silly and OTT (and all the best dialogue).
i wonder how much of Nicholson-Joker's dialogue was written and how much was ad-libbed. |
| demonic |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 15:20:53
Good point. But Nicholson's Joker had a lot of fun, was frequently very silly and OTT (and all the best dialogue). I remember wishing he'd been a bit more frightening at the time though- I never thought he was genuinely insane, he seemed too calculating, and that make-up rictus mouth he had was a bit rubbish really. I still rate Burton's vision of Batman highly; quite of lot of that to do with Keaton's excellent performance. But I hope Ledger doesn't forget to have some fun in his psychosis too.
By the way, I was a voracious Batman comics collector from the mid-80s to the mid-90s and still pick up the odd one-off or collection now and then. Hence my avatar...
|
| damalc |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 13:20:57
i used to be a voracious batman fan in the mid to late 80s, best run in comics in my lifetime. they kind of lost me when they started putting out 8 books per month for one character, though.
as a purist i didn't care for Burton's first Batman film. i was pretty hard on it at the time, but it was better than i gave it credit for.
one of the things i like about the Joker is, whether he's psychotic, psychopathic or delusional, he's really having a good time. in one story, he had Batman at his mercy and considered unmasking him but didn't. there would be no fun in exposing, and possibly losing, his best playmate. now what was fun was to put him in an elaborate death trap later. 
the Ledger-as-Joker picture doesn't look like he's much interested in fun at all. |
| Ali |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 06:57:12
That's right. He was a demented jewel thief in his original form. He then went all campy, and turned more or less into his current psychotic self from mid-seventies onwards.
|
| benj clews |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 23:23:14
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Actually, much as I enjoyed Burton's Batman at the time, I don't really feel it was a very true interpretation of the Joker.
Ah, fair enough. I remember Jack Nicholson's character as basically a sadistic psychopath with a maniacal streak. So, 'manic psychopath' or something. But he definitely appeared 'sane' in that he knew what he was doing and the effects of his actions.
For some reason I've just remembered that I used to read Batman comics when I was a kid, and had forgotten until now.  I can't have thought about it for 25+ years. 
That might explain something... the comic book industry hit a bit of a turning point in the mid-80s when more mature and realistic stories started to be written around long-established characters. I've not read so much early Batman but, from what I have, I seem to recall the Joker was a bit more in touch with reality, usually committing quite petty and *almost* rational crimes. |
| Sean |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 23:12:47
I was actually referring to myself. |
| Ali |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 12:36:46
Don't mock me; I'm fragile.
|
| Sean |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 12:32:29
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Actually, much as I enjoyed Burton's Batman at the time, I don't really feel it was a very true interpretation of the Joker.
Ah, fair enough. I remember Jack Nicholson's character as basically a sadistic psychopath with a maniacal streak. So, 'manic psychopath' or something. But he definitely appeared 'sane' in that he knew what he was doing and the effects of his actions.
For some reason I've just remembered that I used to read Batman comics when I was a kid, and had forgotten until now. I can't have thought about it for 25+ years.
quote:
Originally posted by Ali
...the Joker is described as having a sort of super-sanity, possibly due to a neurological disorder, thus suffering from not just psychological dementia. It is said that he has developed a new modification of human perception.
Adding further weight to the futility of attempting a psychological evaluation of fictional uber-villains bordering on having super-powers. |
| Ali |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 11:28:46
True, and there are further interpretations of the character in the same vein. In "Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth," the Joker is described as having a sort of super-sanity, possibly due to a neurological disroder, thus suffering from not just psychological dementia. It is said that he has developed a new modification of human perception. He sees himself "as the Lord of misrule, and the world as a theatre of the absurd."
He's an �ber-Character. Interestingly, the Joker is usually the only person who references non-canonical or retconned events within any given comics' then-current reality. He might even know about "the real world." I like that. He is the most interesting villain of the DC stable.
|
| benj clews |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 11:10:00
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
It might be worth reading the opening blurb on psychosis at Wiki here:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis
Does that sound like the Joker? I'm not sure it does, although it was a loooooonnngg time ago I saw Batman. I'd describe him as primarily a psychopath, i.e, he kills for personal benefit, knows exactly what he's doing and has no remorse whatsoever.
Actually, much as I enjoyed Burton's Batman at the time, I don't really feel it was a very true interpretation of the Joker. Certainly, in the comic books, it's largely the case that he is believed to be absolutely insane to the point that he's beyond any kind of psychological treatment (despite the fact he's always returned to the remarkably security-lax Arkham Asylum). In some instances he's even driven sane people to madness- it's almost like he's insanity incarnate and his mere presence can take you there with him. |
| shoon |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 10:11:58
quote:
Originally posted by TitanPa
A few years ago Marvel teamed with DC to make a battle of the ages
Wonder Woman vs. Storm
Superboy vs. Spider-man
Captain Marvel vs. THor
Superman vs. Hulk
They actually had Batman vs Captian America. It actually ended in a tie. They couldnt decided who was better (or worse). Actually says something when 2 comic giants cant decide.
That was utterly ridiculous though. Storm defeated Wonder Woman, who, it had been previously claimed, was second only to Supes in terms of strength, with a lightning bolt. Wolverine also beat Lobo (I think), despite the fact Lobo had previously beaten Supes unconscious. It was basically who had the most books out and who was most popular. Batman/Cap was always going to be tight as anything. Rubbish concept anyway, IMO. |
| Sean |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 09:12:16
It might be worth reading the opening blurb on psychosis at Wiki here:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis
Does that sound like the Joker? I'm not sure it does, although it was a loooooonnngg time ago I saw Batman. I'd describe him as primarily a psychopath, i.e, he kills for personal benefit, knows exactly what he's doing and has no remorse whatsoever.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy
A very basic rule of thumb I use for fictional villains (and it would also apply to real-life villains) is... Is he guilty or not? If he has no remorse and you'd punish him as a murderer (and I'd certainly punish the Joker as a murderer) then he's likely a psychopath. If he's not guilty because he didn't know what he was doing (e.g., he killed because the alien spirit sitting on his shoulder told him he needed to kill to save the universe) then he's likely a psychotic. I'll repeat: this is a rule of thumb and in reality life is far more complicated. And even more complicated (and unrealistic) is the glorious world of fictional villains.  |
| Sean |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 06:12:35
quote:
Originally posted by Joe Blevins
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
...I took one look at that picture and had a lot of ideas about just how psychotic this particular Joker might be. We aren't talking explicit gore, but certainly extreme, twisted and completely unjustified killings.
Or did you mean psychopathic? The Joker isn't delusional, is he?
Um... yeah, I might have meant that  Mind, the dictionary definition of psychosis also seems to fit pretty well.
I agree. From The American Heritage Scientific Dictionary:
A mental state caused by psychiatric or organic illness, characterized by a loss of contact with reality and an inability to think rationally. A psychotic person often behaves inappropriately and is incapable of normal social functioning.
I believe that, for conversational purposes, the word "psychotic" is appropriate in describing The Joker.
Ah yep, the old "implausible psychology of a fictional villain" quandary. To be honest I've never read Batman and my only knowledge of the Joker comes from the Jack Nicholson version. I remember him being a ruthless remorseless killer who cackled a lot. That makes him a psychopath, but if he's also a nutcase who doesn't know what's going on then perhaps he's also suffering from psychosis.
The misuse of the word 'psychotic' is one of my pet gripes. It's extensively abused in IMDb plot summaries (used instead of 'psychopathic') to the point where it's become a meaningless word. I think people use it as they like the sound of it. 'Psychotic' would apply to someone like Norman Bates, but certainly doesn't apply to Hannibal Lecter or Spacey's character in Seven.
BTW, there's a highly entertaining article on the psychology of fictional villains at Wiki...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictional_portrayals_of_psychopaths
|
| TitanPa |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 03:40:18
quote:
Originally posted by MisterBadIdea
Batman and Captain America, fighting in the sewers, are alarmed by a sudden flood flushing out the system. Wanting to get in one last move before getting hit by the deluge of sewage, Captain America flings his shield at Batman while Batman fires a batarang at Captain America's head. Cap misses but Batman connects. Captain America goes down, Batman wins. Amalgam happens later.
This is the way it went down, do not challenge me on it. I got the trade paperback for a birthday as a teenager, I read it millions of times.
My apologies. Your more of a geek than I am |
|
|
