Heath Ledger. Just legendary

Jack. I'm sorry, but sometimes to me it feels like people have to say Ledger because he died. I'm not discounting Ledger as an actor, just don't think he played a better Joker then Jack did. I really hate too how ever since that movie came out the Joker's character has been written personality wise, and sometimes drawn, like Azarello's Joker book, like the movie version.

Ledger.

This.

I prefer Jack. But Ledger was epic.

both were great for there respective time .

@azrael_online: @tupiaz: Azzarello's Joker was finished before TDK.

Ledger of course. He deserved that Oscar for that performance and I'm glad he was the only one whose win it as a comic book character.

honestly as good as he was he only won because he died dude. i know that may strike a cord with people but lets be real here. he was nominated for brokeback mountain and didnt win so all of a sudden his acting just happens to have him win for a comic book film? cmon if he didnt die i guarantee you dk wouldnt have been involved in those particular awards

Better = Subjective

I think they are both equally great but they are just different.

However, I can understand why the majority would say Heath Ledger with his unfortunate but infamous demise garnered him a lot of attention. This attention allowed for many to view his performance of the role of Joker.

His performance also recreated Joker and Jokers image forever. I can even see Ledgers performance being considered legendary in a couple decades.

Ledger's Joker has become a iconic Halloween costume as well.

(+)

Jack.

Like most everything in the Burten movies, Jack's Joker was ridiculously campy.

Not my thing.

Heath Ledger's joker was scary & very intimdating, yet mysterious.

I'm loving this thread.

This is a rather …… honest opinion

That's like asking which Batman was better, the wisecracking, campy Batman of the past, or the grim and gritty Batman of the present. *shrug* I say Ledger for me, though Nicholson was also very good and fir the movie he appeared in.

Nope it isn't. The 89's wasn't camp or at least not camp when it was released. The 66 show did have a campy Joker.

Joker was three months released after Dark Knight however the work have begun before that. There was also a pic released from the movie while Lee Bermejo worked on Joker. However Lee Bermejo had made a pic for a website before the movie there was similar to what they used in the movie. Lee Bermejo believes ideas float around at the same time and doesn't take any credits. Also hate is a strong word which I don't however I would like to see different sides of the Joker (the funny part is that Lee Bermejo a this point wants to see something different than Morrison's Joker). I like both the art and the story in Joker however I would like to see different sides of him and not just the one Dark Knight presented.

@modernww2fare: You sonova......your polls' content is controversial!!...all of them!......how dare you!!

I don't like how people try to write off Ledger's performance by saying "People only praise it cause he died."

No, people praised it cause it was praiseworthy. Best live action comic book villain to date, let alone best Joker performance.

@tupiaz Except I wasn't saying the Nicholson movie was campy, I was simply pointing out it was a different type of Joker from Ledger's Joker, just like the campy Batman of the past was a different type of Batman than the Batman of today.

Poor Cesar Romero.

Ledger's was the better performance but I prefer the 1989 film and Jack's joker overall..

My point was that your analogy was bad simply because there is a campy Joker. The difference between the campy Joker and the 89 Joker (and therefore logical the Nolan Joker) is much greater than the difference between the 89 Joker and Nolan Joker.

Ledger.

Semantics at its finest. Again, the main point is that there are innate differences between both groups of Batmen and Joker's. The numerous of differences has nothing to do with it.

I got your point. My point was the numerous of different Jokers but the gap between. The gap between campy Joker and Nolan's Joker is much greater than the gap between '89 Joker and Nolan's Joker. However it would make much more sense and interesting to make a comparison with campy Joker and the '89 Joker since the '89 movie is more or less a dark tale of the campy show. That show seems to get to little credit for the '89 show. However this is really not a topic I want to debate as it is rather pointless.

Yes it is, which is why I fail to understand why it was ever brought up if you understood the actual intent of the post. But whatever.

@nathaniel_christopher: I got your point the second time not the first.

Both were great, but Heath Ledger takes the win for me. Though if you had thrown in Mark Hamil, it would have been a much tougher choice, as I think his best performances are as good as Heath Ledger's performance was.

@the_stegman: well it was an overrated Character in the movie but ledger deserved all the credit he gets. But still his joker is what to overrated none outside comics really ever has been spot I. Even mark

IMHO .. Jack,

Because: I didn't really feel that Heath was the Joker from the Comic.

@cloakx14: I was never scared by the character tbh... and the ending with him hanging... ugh very damn anticlimactic... just aweful. But I'm getting off track. Jack.

The way the Joker was wrote for the 89 movie was very similar to how he was in the comics, but once the move came out DC started adapting him to the movie character. What I find interesting is how a lot of fans were angered about the story in the '89 movie making comparisons to Year One and Frank Miller's work, - but don't really think about the fact that that movie was wrote and scripted years before either of those stories came out

I'm gonna troll and say Mark Hamil :P Seriously I Ledger's Joker is awesome and haven't seen '89 Batman yet but Hamil edges it out over Ledger because Hamil is used to portray a psychopathic supervillain, while Ledger just plays a psychopath.

Definitely Ledger, but Nicholson had his own charm.

I will always prefer Jack. Ledger's Joker was really just an intelligent thug while Jack's was the legit crazy unpredictable lunatic from the books.

Jack was a better translation from the original source material. But let me be clear, I liked both.

Each Joker is stunningly appropriate for the style and theme of each respective movie. Both have believability in their respective universe.

However for me, Ledger wins. When he gets dark and angry, it's a transformation within a transformation.

For those that say he won only because he died, just step back a second and think. A comic book character was nominated for an Oscar, and won! Let me say that again. Somebody won an Academy Award for playing the Joker. I can think of very few other real world endorsements for the credibility of comic and comic movies. We're living in a very cool time.

If this isnt an option im not voting

Well said.

Ledger.The man spent over a month locked in his room basically just to learn how the Joker is portrayed by doing extensive research through the Web and Comics.His Joker is something most if not all people will not forget.He was one of the reasons The Dark Knight is the best CBM out these years.

Jack never really striked me as the Joker.He seemed more like a serial killer rather than the Joker.While Heath is the best interpretation of the Joker in the cinematic universe.His portrayal is the closest one to the comic book Joker.

Maybe I should've added Mark Hamill to the polls.

Yea,it would've been good.

Seeing as how Ledger's obviously the more popular choice in this thread, I'm gonna pit him up against Hamill in a second thread.

Then he would probably lose.

I don't know, there are a lot of Nolanites in Comicvine lol