Punchinello

There's several questions there, I think: it all depends on the writer, really!

In some comics, yes; The Joker loves her only because she reflects who he is, so she's another outlet for him to express his narcissism. In other comics, they're more of a toy/game for each other, like Dini & Co reflected in a B:TaS interview, they love pushing each other's buttons to get the other riled up.  And lastly, in some other comics he does not love her in the true sense of love, I.E: romance.

So it depends on the writer: in short, 50/50 he has equally loved her, and equally just used her for kicks.

I agree that it's silly to put a stop to all movie-Joker roles, or any Joker roles in any media, because Heatho had passed away; but I wholeheartedly agree on the side note that his Joker should not be replaced with CGI or another actor in Nolan's batcanon. I will refuse to watch any more of Nolan's Batman films if he replaces his Joker.

Otherwise, I don't think a death should stop someone else giving The Joker their voice or acting abilities; just not in Nolan's trilogy.

Although nothing can really top B:TAS or hold a candle to that series...

'The Batman' is a piece of garbage, writing and animation quality-wise: that depiction of Joker is one of the main reasons why I'll never touch that show.

I am thrilled that he won it. With all his talent and effort put into such a brilliant role, he earned the award that he deserved =D

I eventually caved in and bought them, had to get something in the end; and why not them?

I'd refuse to see any further additions to Nolan's batverse if somebody else reprises the role of The Joker. It is true that not all Jokers on screen should be 'copying/imitating' the prior Joker, but that's for different directors; so Heath's Joker should not be replaced with a new actor in Nolan's bat!franchise. It'd be the same if Burton made another (god forbid) batman movie, but had somebody else playing the role of Bruce/Batman, Joker, or another character. =/ Both acting and character portrayal wise; it'd be shite. That's just my two cents, though. Don't fix what isn't broken.

Too lazy? I only found it about 2/4 down the page =D

I'm not sure that you've read my OP correctly; I, for one, am a RIP hater. There's no such thing as bringing back 'orignal aspects' for the sake of trying to be 'true' to the canon continuity, when those certain aspects should be buried and forgotten because they're laughable. I.E: Bat-Mite. Time travel. Aliens. Joker and Batman swapping bodies because of that laser. It was laughable in the 50's from whence they came; but no writer should bring them back unless that comic was an acid trip for the characters.

Yahoo Questions aren't a valid source of information. DC Forums and general populations in comic shops, are. It's like saying 'there are heaps of RIP haters OR fans in IMdB who approve of X and Y'.

Multi-verse/cross-over storylines in the batman continuity has been around since.. the dawn of time? Much further back than the 80's.

I'm all for DC sticking to what made their best series fantastic; and they should keep writers like Morrison from screwing with their continuity. Thankfully Dini has been ignoring the lipless/chelseasmile/chinadoll-syndrome/todd+PH+hannibal-clone!Joker, but the new butchered Joker is no longer redeemable simply because he's been shoved into more and more one-shots, limited runs and pointless cameos once R.I.P first began

=/ The Joker only makes a good enough of an impact, and have a point in-characterly (and from the continuity's storyline POV; he shouldn't be used as for comic relief/gags or to 'spice up' the story) if he's used sparingly, and in good taste. DC needs to ease off and settle back to their prior writing style; not fixated on the idea of 'how many villains can we shove into this story to remind the reader that a *cough*human*cough* super-hero like Batman can take on 25 villains because he can take it? Joker is first on the list!shifteleventy!'. The reader shouldn't have the facts shoved into his/her face every time that they open a new comic, that although Batman is only human and can/has been known to take on a mob of people,  (like anybody should know!) DC flips this reasoning over when they push Batman/Bruce Wayne beyond the in-character limits of 'how many people he can face off' so he's really no different to Superman.
Just because Batman can take on a mob of 25 villains, for instance, doesn't mean every single time he has to fight must require 25 villains-or-more that 'should most definitely' include Joker, from DC's reasoning. It takes away the believability and the reality of the batverse when all Batman does is fight those 'mobs of 25 or more' and it not have an impact lke they used to beit's just another cooke-cutter Superman-esque 'final fight/conflict'  (nothing meant towards Superman continuity/fans, however!).  One-on-one clashes between the two are the guidelines. Simply putting Joker's face amongst the mob of 25-villains-or-more should not be. Nor should it be seen as raising the fear or tough factors for Batman to remind the reader how (described loosely in this fashion from how DC seems to be taking Joker) b@d a$$ he is.

Batman and Joker fights, conflicts, meetings/interviews and etc were to say the least acknowledgeable back (prior 1999) when DC weren't throwing Joker into every issue's panel, which is my argument =)

Any of DC... you know. Doing another (TM) Zero-esque move and completely wiping all of the nauseatingly bad canon as of Batman #663-to-present, and keeping their Joker.. well, in-character and not featured in every single new one-shot or other regular comic title?

I miss the days when he was 'rarely' or occasionally used in a comic. If he was used as more than a simple cameo, that comic actually made an acknowledgeable impact on the batverse's timeline and canon. I.E: No Man's Land or Dark Victory. When comics used to be on average, or of average quality, or surpassing that to where the comic/graphic novel was excellent. Even then, the crap comics were just really mediocre.

But nowadays, in the millenium era of comics; has anyone else noticed that the new comics (R.I.P is in a class of it's own, and I mean that in the bad/fail way.) fail to meet even the medicore standards of any comic that was made before 2000? And also, how The Joker is shoved into nearly every new one-shot or limited run or regular batverse title simply 'because' or 'why not?' (Although we all know it's all to do with money)?

This topic is to discuss how low and uncreative/repetitive DC is getting with their  butchering batverse canon, and associated sub-topics like Morrison's atrocious R.I.P. Really: The Batmen of All Nations? The League of Assassains now becoming The League of Man-Bat Assassains? Bat-Mite, for a start.

Thanks, mate!