Dark Knight Fanboys: "Joker Should Be Retired"

[BobisOnlyBob]

I think the character should be retired from the Nolan series of films; give it a few years. The Joker as a character should remain, even in cinematography, but not in the specific (Batman Begins/The Dark Knight) continuity.

 

[Booze Zombie]

Ledger did an epic job as The Joker, in that version of The Batman universe, but I'm sure someone with just as much talent and creativity could have done it as well.

They could reintroduce the The Joker with a different actor, saying that he's gone and had plastic surgery so as to be a bit more stealthy, before finishing his stealth bit and putting on his purple suit and green tie again.

Of course, they'll probably leave the character alone for now and focus on Dr.Freeze, Harley Quin as a Joker fangirl or some other such thing.

Maybe they'll make a new villain? Who knows.

 

[Ionami]

Like the general consensus here, I think it's ridiculous to try and pull the character off all future movies. If Heath was still alive, no one would be bringing this up. The only reason this is an issue is because he's dead, and people love Batman too effing much.

 

[ManBarrel]

I second, third, or 8,295th this motion to retire the joker for Batman movies

 

[Talendra]

I liked both Jack and Heath, the others I have not really watched so I cannot say. The Joker should definitely not be retired, he is an important character in the batman universe. However it would be nice for him to take a back seat and let some of the other villians have a turn, since he is slightly overused.
On a side note, thinking those links were just pictures I opened them all in a new window, only to be greeted by every single joker cackling through my house all at once, it was quite creepy.

 

[Kais86]

I feel the joker should be retired, but not because of the movie, or because Heath Ledger isn't alive anymore, I'm frankly tired of seeing him in comics. The character is played out, done finished, he's played his part now it's time to move on.

 

[Erana]

He did a good job, but part of comic book characters is that they get reimagined. Why not hope that someone could bring a different type of joker into some sort of media?
I'd understand them asking to retire that specific demeanor of Joker, but sheesh...

 

[scotth266]

I've known of this for awhile: but I digress.
It's just plain silly for reasons already listed: the main one being that the Joker character has so many facets to him, and thus so many ways to play him.

 

[Krakyn]

I feel like they should leave the Joker out of this Batman universe. When a new Batman comes along (bring Val back!), I think it would be fine to have a new joker in his world, but I just hate seeing characters change actors mid-series.

So no more Joker til' the next Batman actor, please.

 

[sms_117b]

Heath raised the bar, a lot. The joker won't be retired however there will only be a meager few attempts at the new height. I suspect most will not match it, but I hope to see someone better it.

 

[Kais86]

I feel the joker should be retired, but not because of the movie, or because Heath Ledger isn't alive anymore, I'm frankly tired of seeing him in comics. The character is played out, done finished, he's played his part now it's time to move on.

If you remove The Joker, you remove The Batman.

See? That's the exact mentality that has kept Joker up and running all this time, I've read comics without the Joker in them and was just fine, hell Justice League and Justice League unlimited had 2 whole appearances by the Joker and Batman was still awesome the entire time.

 

[blunted]

I didn't like Heath as the Joker. He wasn't funny. He was just some crazy dude who went around blowing shit up. There's no way such a misrepresentation should be his last appearance.

Mark Hamill and Jack are the best Jokers. I heard Hamill's signed up for the new game, so I'm sure they do the character justice.

 

[Kais86]

I feel the joker should be retired, but not because of the movie, or because Heath Ledger isn't alive anymore, I'm frankly tired of seeing him in comics. The character is played out, done finished, he's played his part now it's time to move on.

If you remove The Joker, you remove The Batman.

See? That's the exact mentality that has kept Joker up and running all this time, I've read comics without the Joker in them and was just fine, hell Justice League and Justice League unlimited had 2 whole appearances by the Joker and Batman was still awesome the entire time.

There are two reasons for this. One, Batman is not the only hero, and two the villain pool is much larger, so Joker can only make so many appeareances. And you're not even talking about straight Batman. You're talking about JL/JLU in which most villains get drawn from Superman's poll anyway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_League_Unlimited#Villains I count 6 of them who are common Superman villains, not including all of Darkseid's friends, especially given that Darkseid is more accurately described as an Orion villain, since Orion fights Darkseid way more than Superman does. Back to the point: you don't need the Joker around to tell a good Batman story. Despite the idiocy involved in it I enjoyed the No Man's Land story line because there was no joker in it, until the end anyway when he showed up long enough to prove that one cop was a nutjob, which any reader would have already determined, and to kill Gordon's wife, all which was unnecessary.

 

[Nazulu]

Do we really need more Batman films? If someone could do a better job of The Joker, they really should make new villian to come out of nowhere like Hannibal Lecture or Darth Vadar.

 

[Kais86]

Of course you don't always need The Joker. It would get pretty dull, pretty fast if he was the only Batman Villain. On the flipside, the comic wouldn't be so interesting without such a well written and unique psychopath which is why I think Ledger's Joker falls flat. Ledger's Joker does not do anything that the Joker is known for. He's simply a nihilist and that's not what the Joker truly is. He's a brilliant sociopath as well as being a psychotic trickster. Ledger played a garden variety psycho in TDK, very little Joker about it. Why retire a character based on an inaccurate performance? Granted Ledger played the part extremely well, but the way the character was written did not do the character justice.

And I still say he would not have won the Oscar if he hadn't died.

Batman doesn't need the Joker at all, having a good villain does not make or break a character, look at Flash, his villains suck, all of them do, except a well done Grodd, yet he is one of the best (and best known) superheroes in existence (partially because of how incredibly powerful he is but also because he's really cool). Flash can live with crappy villains and be popular, which means that Batman can casually live without Joker, and still be popular.

 

[Ago Iterum]

What they have to realise is, the joker has been around since before Heath Ledger. It's bigger than Heath Ledger.

It can't be put more simply than that, he wasn't the only joker, so replacing him won't be anything new.