Movies they shouldn't remake

Status
Not open for further replies.
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

The thing is, Nicholson was great at the time. But when I look back at it, I realize that it's basically Nicholson playing Nicholson and just happens to be dressed up as The Joker. Sure, he was funny and had some great one-liners, but Jack really got the psychotic feel behind the smile, as well.

Ledger's role, on the other hand, is not meant to be taken with a single smile. And really, that's how The Joker should be portrayed. He's this chaotic force of nature. I was excited when Ledger was cast, but I remember friends saying "But...Ledger's not a funny guy." My response? Good! The Joker in the comics (at least in the last 15 years or so) has been portrayed as a huge threat, the kind that even fellow supervillains trade horror stories about. That's the kind of Joker I was looking forward to with Ledger's role.

I think Burton's movies were great at the time, but time (and comparison to Nolan's) have not aged them well. My biggest beef with those series of movies was the portrayal of Commissioner Gordon, who looked like a bumbling oaf instead of the hardass detective we saw in Nolan's films.
 
ScytheRexx

ScytheRexx

Can't we all just agree that Mark Hamil is the best Joker ever? That cartoon captured the Joker more as a combination of murderous lunacy mixed with wacky hi-jinks then I think either movie really pulled off.

I admit though, my entire perception of the Joker was downright shaped by that cartoon.
 
fade

fade

Staff member
ThatNickGuy said:
The thing is, Nicholson was great at the time. But when I look back at it, I realize that it's basically Nicholson playing Nicholson and just happens to be dressed up as The Joker. Sure, he was funny and had some great one-liners, but Jack really got the psychotic feel behind the smile, as well.

Ledger's role, on the other hand, is not meant to be taken with a single smile. And really, that's how The Joker should be portrayed. He's this chaotic force of nature. I was excited when Ledger was cast, but I remember friends saying "But...Ledger's not a funny guy." My response? Good! The Joker in the comics (at least in the last 15 years or so) has been portrayed as a huge threat, the kind that even fellow supervillains trade horror stories about. That's the kind of Joker I was looking forward to with Ledger's role.

I think Burton's movies were great at the time, but time (and comparison to Nolan's) have not aged them well. My biggest beef with those series of movies was the portrayal of Commissioner Gordon, who looked like a bumbling oaf instead of the hardass detective we saw in Nolan's films.
Click to expand...
Yes and no on Ledger. The audience shouldn't laugh. The heroes and even the fellow villains shouldn't laugh. But Joker should find it all frickin' hilarious. Ledger didn't. There are a billion ominous evil soulless killers out there in the movies--and real life. But the Joker is sort of unique. That's what I mean when I say Ledger and Nolan made him a generic sociopath.
 
Null

Null

Fade, I'm going to have to seriously disagree. There were times when Ledger's Joker could barely talk for laughing at what he was doing. Like falling over and accidentally spraying bullets at one point. He thought what he was doing was a riot.
 
fade

fade

Staff member
He did, but I thought he and Nolan were trying to make it painfully obvious that it was fake laughter.
 
fade

fade

Staff member
You'll have to show me an example of these scenes, because I really fail to remember anything like you're describing.

---------- Post added at 06:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:32 PM ----------

I mean, when his henchman gets shocked trying to remove batman's mask we get this harsh, mirthless, disdainful laugh, that doesn't seem truly amused so much as intentionally forced. There's no eye component to the smile, which I assumed was on purpose. The joking around with rachael while eating shrimp was the same. Flat and mirthless. More sneering than laughing. I got a whole "the world owes me something" feel out of it, rather than mirth or glee.
 
fade

fade

Staff member
Believe what you want to, but I saw no mirth in his laughter, and it sure looked to me that the rest of his facial features were either flat or angry. I mean almost to cartoony obvious extremes. The entire point was that I didn't have to pull it from anywhere, because they practically put it in your face like one of the real Joker's pies.

Also, I never once said I hated Ledger's joker. In fact, I said he was a good character. Just not the Joker. I think I've officially said that like a billion times now.
 
Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

Telling us how you interpreted it, and telling us how you saw Ledger and Nolan planning it are two entirely different things.









(Anti-Life justifies Fade's hate.)
 
Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

Here's the thing: Ledger was a great performance in a good movie, and Nicholson's was a bad performance in a bad movie. I couldn't give a fuck who was more like my arbitrary idea of "the joker".
 
Null

Null

What's the point of citing an example to you, Fade? You'll just say that you see this or that in it, proving (to you) that it's forced, or fake, or lifeless, which is obviously how Nolan and Ledger were planning it all along, nevermind that you're pretty much the only person who sees it.
 
Silver Jelly

Silver Jelly

I'd say that if you see the laughter is forced, you see it's forced and you will obviously think that was made on purpose. It's not so difficult to understand that Fade isn't trying to be antagonistic for the sake of it, he just interpets the character that way. And while you see the Joker enjoying himself, he doesn't. Examples or not, that's not how he sees it.

And the best thing is that both interpretations are right. One is more "classic" joker, the other one is similar to the Joker's character in "The killing Joke", for example. And even if there was no comic joker to link it to, it's perfectly fine to think whatever you want about the character and the possible intentions of the filmaker! Where's the problem?

I don't know, man, sometimes it feels like this forum has something against Fade...
 
Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

Silver Jelly said:
I'd say that if you see the laughter is forced, you see it's forced and you will obviously think that was made on purpose. It's not so difficult to understand that Fade isn't trying to be antagonistic for the sake of it, he just interpets the character that way. And while you see the Joker enjoying himself, he doesn't. Examples or not, that's not how he sees it.

And the best thing is that both interpretations are right. One is more "classic" joker, the other one is similar to the Joker's character in "The killing Joke", for example. And even if there was no comic joker to link it to, it's perfectly fine to think whatever you want about the character and the possible intentions of the filmaker! Where's the problem?

I don't know, man, sometimes it feels like this forum has something against Fade...
Click to expand...
Fade has something against the forum. He doesn't like it.
 
Tress

Tress

sixpackshaker;451783][QUOTE=escushion;451249][QUOTE=Silver Jelly said:
I don't know, man, sometimes it feels like this forum has something against Fade...
Click to expand...
Fade has something against the forum. He doesn't like it.[/QUOTE]

Null seems to have something for Fade. It seems Fade can't post anything that is not glowing with love of random crap entertainment, without Null trying to call him out with juvenile, bullying behavior.[/QUOTE]

I didn't really see anything that was juvenile or bullying. Just two people who strongly disagree.
 
D

Disconnected

I like the scream franchise. I think this will do fine. was it needed? no not really... or is it? dun Dun DUUUUUN,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top