Did Heath Ledger make Joker more stabby than shoot-shoot?

[Coola Yagami]

I know the Joker wouldn't care if he killed you with a gun or knife, but I seem to recall the Joker being more trigger-happy than stabby-stab. He'd always use either regular gun or some sort of gimmick gun (boxing glove gun or whatever). I'm not sure about the comics but it seems coincidental both his appearances in the DC fighting games and the Young Justice cartoon made him wave knives around a lot more, and they both came out after The Dark Knight. Especially with that one line where Joker stated he preferred to stab his victims than shoot them to savour their last moments, I'm wondering if outside media decided to use that movie as a template to make Joker Stabber McStabby over Try to Shoot Batman with a Joker-Face Gun.

[Leo656]

It's very possible that the movie popularized it, but that's almost certainly not where it originated.

I tried to dig into this, but rather unfortunately, the overwhelming popularity/prevalence of the Dark Knight film invariably brings ANY search about the Joker and knives back to the movie even if you try and specifically look into his comic book history. The most you're likely to find is various wikis and things which state than the Joker has used "a variety of knives" as part of his arsenal over the years, without any specifics as to When or How.

Point of fact, even "regular" guns were a rarely-used (or at least somewhat more recently common) weapon in Joker's arsenal for the longest time. His most preferred and prolific methods of murder from his inception and for many years after generally involved poisons and/or various acids. Aside from that, his methods were often more "gag"-oriented - explosives designed as harmless regular items, his "harpoon gun" which would initially shoot out a harmless "BANG!" flag before then impaling the victim by projecting said flag from the barrel of the gun, and other things of that nature. And although he would occasionally use a regular knife in a pinch, he was far more apt to use the sword hidden in his cane when it came to matters of slashing and stabbing people.

For most of the Joker's comic book history, regular guns and knives were rarely part of his regular arsenal simply because they were not theatrical enough, or in wrestling parlance, "They didn't fit the gimmick".

Obviously, the character has since evolved into someone who'd just as soon kill someone with a paper clip if that's all he had to work with, but initially, if the Joker was going to kill someone for any reason at all, he'd prefer to do it "With Style" or not at all (For example, in one memorable instance, NOT killing someone with an exploding cigar and giving him a harmless ordinary one instead, simply for reasons of "Never give 'em what they expect." Since the "victim" fully expected to be killed by means of said cigar, Joker instead let him live just because it would be funnier that way).

These are all examples of how the character's portrayal has changed to various degrees in the hands of different writers. Tim Burton, for example, had the Joker initially be an ordinary gangster, so we see him quite often killing people with an ordinary pistol as a holdover from his previous persona, although in the comics that was somewhat more rare (if the Joker was liable to shoot someone at all, it would most often be either with the aforementioned Harpoon Gun or a Tommy Gun, since either would be more over-the-top than a mere pistol). Likewise, the Dark Knight film wanted to present an even more "grounded" and "nastier" take on The Joker and have him be a more "up close and personal" style of killer, so they chose to have him use a knife as his primary method even though the "real" Joker would think that was rather "boring". Although it worked quite well for how it was presented in the movie.

Short answer: That's almost certainly not the first example of the Joker killing people with knives, but it was the first to make it his preferred method. Thus, a combination of "more people watch movies than read comic books" along with a general desire to have his character in media like video games follow suit with the film and present a more "realistic" take on the character has led to it becoming much more prevalent in recent years than it ever had been previously.

[IMJ]

Knives are intimate. It takes a different kind of killer to get in close and dirty with a knife than it does to pull a trigger and walk away. Usually a complete POS Psychopath.

I think that is what they were going for with Ledger. This guy is lacking empathy so badly that he will get in there, in your face with a knife and watch you while he uses it.

That's the template.

[Leo656]

More or less. But it's also a pretty stark contrast to how the character originated.

Such as he initially preferred to use poisons - specifically time-release ones, much of the time - to ensure that he would always be as far away from the scene of the crime as possible, both ensuring he would always get away with it and baffling everyone as to how he'd managed to pull it off. That was a huge, huge part of his M.O. for the longest time. He almost never "lowered himself" to getting his own hands that dirty and preferred to make a game of things instead. It used to be a pretty rare event when he'd actually kill someone using face-to-face methods. Like he had to be REALLY pissed off or backed into a corner.

However, back then he also only killed people for rather specific reasons, most times, whereas now he's mostly written as someone who almost has a sexual fetish for violence and murder and would just as soon skin and eat an entire busload of babies just to see how they taste. So yeah, the knives sort of fit in better with THAT portrayal of the character, as someone who doesn't just use murder as a means to an end but is in fact in love with the act of murder in and of itself. But that version is still a rather recent incarnation and something of an outlier in his overall history.

I guess a "Jack the Ripper" type guy is more visceral and frightening for the purposes of a movie. But the comics also had him take a sharp turn into a darker sort of violence somewhere after the mid-90s. Like, I didn't like the "Three Jokers" gimmick, but one could almost accept it simply because his portrayal has changed SO much over the years. I'm fine with Morrison's "He's just a special kind of crazy and constantly reinvents himself" by way of an explanation, especially as I don't like to over-complicate things. But you COULD almost believe that he's been entirely different people, just given how his methods have at times been so wildly different.

Like, remember when he got Mxyzptlk's power and became "Emperor Joker", and he flat-out just ATE China? That was nuts. Awesome, but nuts. Like the guy started out his criminal career just gassing people to death so he could steal diamonds, and now he's just up and eating human beings by the billion because he thinks it's hilarious. One could be forgiven for not believing it's the same guy.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Leo, I think you mentioned in some other thread that being funny and telling jokes was not Joker's gimmick in his earlier appearances. That's something that never crossed my mind. I would like to know when or where the change came from because I feel like it was something the Animated Series started, though I could be wrong.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by LeotheLateBloomer

Leo, I think you mentioned in some other thread that being funny and telling jokes was not Joker's gimmick in his earlier appearances. That's something that never crossed my mind. I would like to know when or where the change came from because I feel like it was something the Animated Series started, though I could be wrong.

I thought he always told jokes and puns, joker fish and all.

I do know the animated series version had a big ego and wanted people to find him funny. The only thing that pisses him off more than someone else killing Batman is nobody finding him funny.

[Leo656]

It wasn't his WHOLE gimmick. It's complicated. And I'm probably not the best person to explain it.

Like, "being funny for funny's sake" was never the point any more than "just murdering for murder's sake" was. He's explicitly not "a comedian", but he's also not just a psycho. I guess the best way to explain it would be that, ideally, he never does anything "funny" unless it ends with someone being hurt or killed, and he doesn't hurt or kill anyone unless he can do it with some sort of macabre theatrical flair. There's always a balance between the two.

This was best fleshed out in a story from 1990 or so where there was an imposter Joker running around. He'd basically stage a heist, tell a dumb joke, and then kill someone in silly ways. But Batman was immediately able to see through it because the M.O. was all wrong for the real Joker, with far too much emphasis on weak attempts at "being funny" and the actual murders themselves not matching up to things the real Joker would actually do. In turn, it led the real Joker out of hiding because the impersonator was ruining his reputation by being such a poor copycat (although he'd been able to fool everyone except Batman, initially, because... well, he's Batman).

Anyways, that story did a good job of explaining the distinction of how exactly the Joker typically operates. "Being goofy" and/or "being a psycho" don't portray the character properly, in and of themselves. And it's rather easy to write the character poorly by leaning too far into one or the other. That's about as well as I can explain it.

The cartoon did more or less steer him away from Violence and more towards Vaudeville, but that's more or less to be expected with the constraints of a kids' show. And it's not like that's the first time they did that. I mean, they couldn't have him shooting people in the face with acid at 3:30 in the afternoon, even if that's more appropriate for the character. So when you subtract from something, you have to add to something else. Makes sense, but it's also why I don't see the cartoon version as the "definitive" one the way some do. It's not a bad version, but it is a rather watered-down and "safe" one.

[Coola Yagami]

I have those issues. Joker was still recovering from getting shot at the end of Death in the Family. I like the part when he got shot again and it freaked him out but there was the fake Joker challenging Batman at the dates chemical plant.

Knowing he 'had' to be there to set things straight. He kicked the radio down and yelled out "I'M NOT READY!! But I have to!!"

That was a classic story.

[Leo656]

It's a good'n!

It was really impactful at the time because Joker hadn't been seen at all since the end of "Death in the Family", aside from a one-panel cameo at the end of the Secret Origins Special. It felt like the right time to bring him back, but if not for the Burton movie they may as well have left him on the bench for another six months to a year. The spectre of The Joker still loomed large over the books even when he wasn't an active participant, but after the movie came out and was such a hit they pretty much had no choice but to bring him back. But the "We don't know if he's dead and he might come back at any moment" angle was still in play even when he himself wasn't, and it was pretty cool.

Writers had restraint back then. They did this Big Huge Joker Story and then didn't use him at all for almost three years. Then after that one "comeback" story he didn't do much of anything until "Robin II: Joker's Wild!" They were really good about spacing out his appearances and making them impactful. They knew how to do a good, slow burn back then. I miss that. You didn't see the Big Villains all the time; instead you got a lot of "smaller" stories with guys like Anarky or The Crimesmith that were just as solid and then when you did get a Big Villain Story it felt like an actual event because you only got like two or three issues a year of that.

Nowadays if they're not using a Big Villain they just don't bother doing the story. It's not just a Batman thing, it's pretty much with anybody.

[Coola Yagami]

Duuude, crimesmith was my first Batman comic when I wanted to try em out. Batman getting sliced in the leg by a laser reminded me this was no Adam West nonsense.

And you're right. They had more stories about thugs and such but they were still good. I miss that era.

Hallmark would sell different versions of Batman ornaments every year. The year they released one based on early 90s blue Batman with the oval, I was like 'i gotta get it, that's MY Batman. That's the Batman I grew up reading.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

The year they released one based on early 90s blue Batman with the oval, I was like 'i gotta get it, that's MY Batman. That's the Batman I grew up reading.

Me too.
Check out the "Legends of the Dark Knight by Norm Breyfogle" hardcover. It is awesome.

[Leo656]

Man, Breyfogle was such a revelation. Don't get me wrong, I grew up on Jim Aparo's artwork and to a great degree that's STILL "My Batman". And as a kid, the more "stylized" take Breyfogle was using in Detective Comics took a bit to grow on me. It was strange to see the Aparo artwork in the main book and the Breyfogle artwork in 'Tec running side-by-side every month, at first. But then it slowly clicked, especially since the storylines in 'Tec were often slightly darker and the art really put that over.

I think what really put it over the top for me was the issue of the Mud Pack storyline with Robin's ghost on the cover, taunting Batman. This one here:


I was only reading the main Batman book at the time, mostly, but when my Dad brought that one home from the 7-11 when I was a kid, it really blew me away. I mean the cover is amazing but the entire book inside was also great in a really twisted way, and after that I was hooked. I still preferred the Aparo stuff as it was more "on-model" or whatever in a mainstream commercial sense, but I was able to really appreciate Breyfogle's art in a completely different but equal way. Absolutely one of the best Batman artists of all time.

"The Last Arkham" was another great story with Breyfogle art. It was a great story regardless, but that artwork... man. I don't think anyone could have drawn it better. That last shot of Zsasz where Batman says to Jeremiah "You want to see 'madness', Arkham? THAT is MADNESS!" and Zsasz has that sadistic grin and those black eyes... I loved that sh*t.

I've said this a hundred times but that story would make an absolutely perfect Batman movie without any changes whatsoever. But even as a comic, it's one of the very best.

[Andrew NDB]

Mmm... probably a combination of TDK take being a popular one and a lot of Batman writers of the past few years being anti-gun.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Man, Breyfogle was such a revelation. Don't get me wrong, I grew up on Jim Aparo's artwork and to a great degree that's STILL "My Batman". And as a kid, the more "stylized" take Breyfogle was using in Detective Comics took a bit to grow on me. It was strange to see the Aparo artwork in the main book and the Breyfogle artwork in 'Tec running side-by-side every month, at first. But then it slowly clicked, especially since the storylines in 'Tec were often slightly darker and the art really put that over.

I think what really put it over the top for me was the issue of the Mud Pack storyline with Robin's ghost on the cover, taunting Batman. This one here:
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....4,203,200_.jpg

I was only reading the main Batman book at the time, mostly, but when my Dad brought that one home from the 7-11 when I was a kid, it really blew me away. I mean the cover is amazing but the entire book inside was also great in a really twisted way, and after that I was hooked. I still preferred the Aparo stuff as it was more "on-model" or whatever in a mainstream commercial sense, but I was able to really appreciate Breyfogle's art in a completely different but equal way. Absolutely one of the best Batman artists of all time.

"The Last Arkham" was another great story with Breyfogle art. It was a great story regardless, but that artwork... man. I don't think anyone could have drawn it better. That last shot of Zsasz where Batman says to Jeremiah "You want to see 'madness', Arkham? THAT is MADNESS!" and Zsasz has that sadistic grin and those black eyes... I loved that sh*t.

I've said this a hundred times but that story would make an absolutely perfect Batman movie without any changes whatsoever. But even as a comic, it's one of the very best.

I loved that mudpack arc too...

That Norm Brefogle hardcover I mentioned is all you could ask for as a fan of that era. I've got it here in my bookshelf next to me. It's one of those trades I'll keep forever. Pure eyecandy....