80 Years of The Joker
 

https://i.imgur.com/7eqkP7F.jpg


80 years ago today Joker debuted in Batman Comics in 1940. Since than he has had many different looks many actors playing the character and many voice actors giving their take on the character

One of my favorite characters in all comics. I've always loved him as villain or vile yet charming antagonist, but Heath Ledger's performance kicked my love of the character into high-gear, showing me just how charismatic, mesmerizing, and explosive the character can be. The Killing Joke by Alan Moore, which I only just read around 2007 was also instrumental in showing me the depth of the character.

Now, I can hardly believe it, but he has his own film in the "Joker", which is nearly perfect in my eyes. Would love to see a sequel, but most all, I just can't wait to see where this character goes over the next few decades.

Same Joker is my Favorite.

The Joker was created in the 1951.

No, he was created in 1940.

Anyway it's weird how "a clown" became one of the most iconic comic book villains of all time. I wonder if The Joker started the fear of clowns people had throughout the mid 1900's.

What? You can literally just go on Wikipedia and check the right date. Why did you think it was 1951?

Heath Ledger seems to be missing in that group of live actors.

there's 3 non LA Jokers in the picture :lol:

Changed the Picture. Found a better on on Mark Hamill's twitter

Cesar Romero today is very underrated, I know people bring up Jack Nicholson or Heath Ledger or even voice actor Mark Hamill as the best Joker ever? But in the Adam West TV show? Cesar Romero was near the top of the villains' of that show, perhaps only being outshine by the Riddler and the Penguin. For the 60's I think Romero was king in regards of being the light hearted Joker. ? How many villain's would take on Batman in a surf contest?

Agreed. Joker was my favourite villain on that show. He was so hilariously played by Romero.

Also 80 anniversary Hugo Strange

Cesars Joker wasnt just laughs : when he was gonna behead B & R , when cheerleader Susie almost died he just "no big deal"......a sinister side

Oh, man. That's dark.

Ditto.

Why do you guys think the Joker works so well? What makes him popular as opposed to other rogues? Even outside of Batman's gallery, there's something special with the character.

Maybe because he has so much fun being evil? Or he makes evil look like fun?

I think the attractiveness of Joker lies somewhere in contradiction.
A character who can act off his every whim, behave irrationally, and throw caution to the wind over and over within the safe confines of his structured comic book world.
No matter how much he risks, life or death, he has a permanent spot reserved, no one is taking his place, and he will be back.
Sometimes I think the character even knows this himself on a meta-level.

How did you guys honor the Father of Gamers Rights yesterday? I protested society by staying out ten minutes past mandatory lockdown. I feel like the Jokester would be proud of me.

Bruce Timm said the best Joker is the one that mixes seriousness with playfulness and fun, and that's why the DCAU Joker is so popular. Joker could throw a pie in your face in one moment or threaten to blow up a building in another.

Cubed has it exactly. I feel like Hammil's Joker is the perfect balance between morbid humor and psychotic evil. Cesar and Jack, too, to some extent, as each was both hilarious and twisted at the same time. He's sick and horribly malicious, but he likes to have fun and be outrageously clever and funny while he's doing it. I never found Ledger to have that quality, in fact I thought he went way too far into the "evil psycho" side, without the actual "Clown prince of Crime" persona to balance it. Just being bad of the sake of going against society. And I never took Joker as overly philosophical, but rather just able to laugh at the absurdity of his own life and situations. Nor does he fit the profile of someone who would self-mutilate like Ledger's Joker did. He's too much of a narcissist for that.

You don't know that he gave himself the scars, that's just one of several conflicting stories he told in the film (in another story he says his father cut him), establishing that this Joker, like all of them in every universe, is an unreliable narrator. He's also a liar, as he calls himself an "agent of chaos" yet the entire film centers around his meticulously micro-managed plan, which ultimately more or less succeeds because he creates a scenario that forces Batman to kill Harvey Dent, thus completing Joker's ruination of Harvey and getting Batman to break his "One Rule", which Joker promised he would do. These are both consistent character traits of the Joker regardless of universe. Ledger's Joker simply leans more into psychological than theatrical methods, but the Joker has always utilized a combination of both. There's no one "correct" established balance in representing the Joker, and frankly the fact that they didn't have him stopping the movie to hit people with poison pies or whatever was incredibly refreshing.

Also, anyone who doubts the theatricality and comedic timing of Ledger's Joker perhaps missed the "Pencil Scene", but really that entire scene with him and the gangsters, not just the one gag. Classic, classic Joker, straight out of the comics. Bits like that which were somewhat more humorous simply wouldn't have played so well if they weren't counter-balanced with strong depictions of what a monster the guy is. And that, at the end of the day, is what the Joker is: A remorseless killer. Obviously there's shades of how you can play it, but he still ultimately needs to be an irredeemable scumbag you're not really supposed to root for. There's a very thin line when portraying villains where it becomes easy to make them into a babyface just because they're so much fun, but it also fundamentally breaks the story when you do that because you're not supposed to root for the bad guy, otherwise they're the babyface by default. Ledger's Joker was a perfectly executed villain who walked the line between being fun to watch but also reminded you why he's a sh*theel. Which is tough to pull off with that character.

Part of why I've never taken the animated version as my favorite is simply because he's too likeable. It's a good Joker, but he's literally a cartoon. There's only so much you can do within a kids' cartoon and this is a guy who crippled Barbara Gordon and shot Commissioner Gordon's wife in the face after threatening to kill a truckload of babies. I never, ever felt that sense of menace from the animated Joker, and you should ALWAYS feel uncomfortable when Joker shows up. The "safe danger" inherent in a kids' cartoon simply neuters villains like Joker by promising that they won't ever do anything TOO horrific, that this is all a lark and you can laugh at these bad guys. But in the comics, Joker isn't a "funny" character, he's dangerous. People speak of him in hushed tones because they're afraid he might be listening, afraid of what he'll do. He's a "performance artist" whose performance art is killing people (something I felt the Nicholson version did a good job with). To me, you can't remove virtually all the danger from a villain and then call that the definitive version of that villain. That's why although I love the show, like the portrayal just fine for what it is, but it can never be the "definitive" Joker to me, simply because he's more clown than menace due to Standards & Practices. Unavoidable, sure, but still a flaw, points taken off.

Ultimately, though, all the various Jokers across all media have some strong merits to them. Even Leto's version which is so fun to hate on had a LOT that was reminiscent from the comic books, aside from the visual flair of tattoos and "grill", that was a bit too much. Pretty much every scene he was in made me think, "That reminds me of that thing in Issue ___ of ________" which always makes me forgive a lot. I would have gone more traditional with some of the "flair" but nothing about the portrayal felt particularly off. I can see why people comparing him to the other films' Jokers, or a cartoon show, might be pretty unhappy but as I've said elsewhere, my primary source is always the books and Leto's version still fits in line pretty well overall. I just don't think the film itself did his version of the character too many favors, but that's a whole other conversation.

At the end of the day, though, like I said, I find them all pretty valid. Romero's Joker was worlds away from what came later (or before), but was almost 1:1 with how the Joker character was depicted in the 1950s and 60s. It's not my preference but it was pretty much identical to what was on the printed page at the time. Nicholson's take was mostly just him being himself but it still took a lot from the comics. Ledger, I think, is still my overall favorite because it strongly reminds me not just of the more ruthless Joker of the 80s up through now, but also of the original story in Batman #1; like if you read the original Joker story and then watch Dark Knight, there's so much that feels the same even though the details are different. Like him having set traps to kill people without him being present or anyone ever knowing he was there. It was incredibly obvious, to me, where the various inspiration for that version came from, predominantly Batman #1 and a few scenes from Killing Joke, among others. Details were changed, but the spirit was the same, and that's always what impresses me. No other version to me so far has felt quite as authentic about getting the important details right about who this guy is and how he behaves.

Phoenix's version is interesting to me because while I felt like he did a great job with the script he was given, I agree with those who say there's still something "missing" in between the Arthur Fleck we see at the end of the film, and the fully-formed "Joker" of almost every other medium. I can see him becoming that guy but there's still some missing information. Like he was a very convincing crazy person and they did a good job with executing what they wrote, but aside from being a murderous lunatic Joker's also a criminal mastermind, usually, and Arthur's still too much of a washout by the end of the film to really "sell" me as a guy who could one day go on to hold Gotham City hostage or outsmart Batman. Again, that's not entirely a knock, I can still see him "evolve" into that but he's definitely not that guy yet at the end of his "origin" movie. I expect the inevitable sequel will fill in some of that data, and I'd be perfectly fine seeing him play the "real" Joker and not just Larval Stage Joker because I thought he did a good job with the material that was actually in the film and I'd be happy with more. But when people say, "He still wasn't 'THE Joker' by the end of the film," I kinda have to agree. But I don't think it would take a very long bridge to get him there, either, and it would be fun to see.

The only Joker I've seen a fair bit of and don't like much at all, would be the one from "The Batman" animated series that came out after Batman Begins. And I fully admit that I was probably hung up on the visuals, but I definitely did not dig the barefoot and straightjacket look, nor his super-long hair and apelike posture. That whole thing to me reeked so much of "Let's be different for the sake of being different" that I completely checked out and probably didn't give the performance a fair shake. But I'm not terribly inclined to go back and see if I was fair, either. But yeah, other than that one, all the Jokers we've seen have various degrees of strong merit, to me. And I think that speaks a lot to the character itself, that you can have a Cesar Romero and Heath Ledger version and both of them are perfectly "correct" from entirely different directions. I really can't think of too many characters in all of fiction that have that sort of range, and it's probably why it's such an enduring character.

I agree on a lot of your points, though admittedly I've only seen the BTAS version in the cartoons for animated Jokers, so not sure how the later series fit in. My biggest beef on Ledger was how his humor side was really NOT funny in any way, even the pencil gag just came off as another way to show what a psycho he was. That to me just doesn't jibe with how he has always had that kind of cruel slapstick sense of humor, where it was vicious, but still could be seen as amusing by others, albeit morbidly so. Sadistic humor, if you will, but still "funny haha" not JUST "funny in the head". And we DID see him give himself the razor-blade "smile" on screen, so even if it was a "lie", it's still completely out of character, since no other version I know of would have ever one such a thing to himself. To OTHERS? Certainly, but not to himself. He's far too vain to mar his own "good looks" that way. That's something I notice that seems to get overlooked- his personal vanity. He's often seen primping, straightening his tie, combing back his hair, etc, in comics, movies, and especially in the BTAS series. Romero did it a lot too. It's a subtle trait that most probably never even pick up on, but it's there. Ledger's Joker was kind of a slap in the face to that vain, narcissistic side. The part of him that views himself as above everyone else in some twisted way.

I loved most of what was done in Nolan's movies, but that version of Joker kind of left a sour taste for me. As for Leto, it was- different. If I'm being honest, probably my second least favorite. I would have liked to see the Jerome/Jeremiah Joker explored further after Gotham ended, as they kind of took some of the best qualities from other versions and melded them together beautifully. Jerome was a bit more sadistic, but also more "fun", while Jeremiah leaned more on the Anarchist, mastermind side. Both were kind of dramatic and deadly evil, with cruel and nasty tempers, and Jeremiah was pretty narcissistic, too. Put them together, and you basically had the quintessential Joker over the entire spectrum of his various incarnations.

Don't forget The Joker from the Batman Arkham videogames, (Asylum, City, Origins, Knight)

https://www.madhouse.it/files/Madhou...134_342111.JPG

There's 4 Batman Arkham videogames now which basically carved out their own universe to be the definitive Batman videogame universe, and it's a nice mix of cartoon and comic Joker with Mark Hammil doing the voice.

I forgot to mention I don't pay attention to Gotham because I hated that show like I hate the dentist. :lol: So I never saw their "Joker" but what I saw from photos was quite eye-rolling.

I didn't talk much about Joker in the Arkham games but that's another really, really good one.

I've watched "Dark Knight" a bunch of times and I'm right now trying to look for it but I'm finding absolutely nothing about Ledger's Joker giving himself the facial scars onscreen. I'm not inclined to watch the entire movie right now to prove or disprove it but I feel you're strongly misremembering that part. If someone finds a clip of Ledger's Joker cutting his own face, I'm open to it, but I personally don't think that's right.

I personally wasn't put off at all by the fact that his hair was a bit unkempt. He's occasionally had longer/wilder hair in the comics. He dressed well. He was hardly a slob or anything. His "vanity", to me, was perfectly well-displayed in his air of superiority, knowing that he was the smartest person in the room in every scene and expressing it through his words and body language. All the personality traits were there, some of them were simply prioritized higher than others in service to the larger story.

But as far as vanity goes, he also did "fix his hair" with the knife, which was very in-character and very, very funny. :lol:

I hated Gotham also. If you look up the word Cluster**** in the Dictionary you find Gotham.

I watched the first couple of episodes. I think I quit when they did one with people getting taken away by balloons or something. As someone who loathed Smallville, I detest those kinds of "prequel" shows anyway most of the time, and Gotham was so goofy it felt like it needed a laugh track, even though it obviously wasn't trying to be funny. Never "watched" it again, but I'd see snippets of episodes on Mute with subtitles while I was at the gym and everything I saw only reinforced that I made the right decision by walking away. I have enough silver hair.

We never saw Heath's Joker give himself a scar, he just implied it with one of his stories while mimicking the movements with his hand and knife.

In the script for "Joker", we see Arthur cut the scar into his mouth, which was then changed during filming, but that's the closest thing I can think of aside from that.

Yeah, I kinda didn't think I'd forgotten something such as that. That's the kinda thing one might remember. Perhaps Duckie merely had a Mandela Effect-style moment. It happens.

There's a ton of good theories about Ledger's Joker going around. The "ex-military personnel" one definitely makes a ton of sense and fits the overall tones and themes of the film/series quite well. On another track, I personally think that the stuff about his terrible father had more than a grain of truth to it, as well, simply because it's the only thing about his "backstory" that he mentions more than once. I'm sure both of those things could be true.

I think it's very, very neat that we spend most of the movie with that Joker and by the end of it we don't know anything more about him than we started with, just lots and lots of things to guess about. And it leans heavily into another thing, the reason this particular Joker is so "grimy" and "evil" in this movie; we really are seeing that version of the Joker through the other characters' eyes throughout the film in a sense. And by the end, they still don't know anything about him, and neither do we. The stuff in that movie just works on so many levels. It's really still quite incredible to me.

I've heard the ex-military Joker theory and I don't know. I don't think I could imagine Ledger's Joker being sane at any one point in his life. You're not supposed to think of him outside of the context of the film, and the narrative roles he fulfills. It's the effectiveness of the character, and it's never bogged down in backstory or unimportant details.

If you want to talk a background for the Nolanverse Joker, I think being an MK-Ultra/CIA experiment victim is a lot more believable. Look at guys like Ted Kaczynski, who were basically groomed into insanity from programs like that. It's a take that I think has more depth and suits the Nolan trilogy a lot better than just Joker being a vet.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I prefer mystical/occult ties Joker, even if the character is unaware of these ties himself. Joker being something anciently old sent from hell is a great idea with piss poor execution.

Hmm, I DO remember the part where he was telling his story and had the knife in hand on his face, I could swear that he was actually cutting it, but that might have been already there, I dunno. Point is, it took me right out of the character and movie, and from that point on, I could not see him as the Joker. It was too oddly out of character from everything I'd ever seen of Joker anywhere. Self-cutting just doesn't fit his style. Whether he actually DID it in that scene or not, we are led to believe that he DID at least do it at some point, and it just doesn't ring true to me. Especially since he was literally asking Bats why he was so serious all the time, all the while doing (or pretending, whichever) to do something so creepily masochistic with a straight face and no sign of any emotion at all! Just- no. Don't care what universe Joker's in, that's not his bag.

As for Gotham, I feel like anyone who quit after only the first few eps (yeah, the balloon guy was kind of hokey) really missed out on a good origin story. It didn't really hit its stride until a couple of eps later, so maybe it's worth giving a second look? (You can feel free to skip that balloon one, it was subpar for the series as a whole.) Bruce growing up, bringing in the Court of Owls, Cobblepot and Nygma's love/hate relationship, the beginning of Scarecrow, and even Pyg showed up. There was really a lot there to like, once it got past the early wobbles.