by Kelsey Mckernan

Created on: December 10, 2008   Last Updated: December 29, 2008

Having been an avid fan of the Batman movies my whole life, I have seen the two different variations of the Joker. Both of which Jack Nicholson and Heath Ledger portray convincingly well. When it comes to the idea of who portrays the classic comic villain better, I'd have to agree with the majority of critics who say Heath Ledger. Now don't get me wrong, Jack Nicholson did an amazing job of convincing us Jack Napier was a complete psychopath that had an appetite for destruction in a cynical yet funny way, but Ledger's interpretation of the Joker hit a higher level of insanity. Nineteen years after Nicholson's portrayal, Ledger's version of the Joker displays a more modern view of a mentally unstable villain.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /

>
When we first see the Joker in The Dark Knight, he has just finished pulling off an insane bank job where he assembled a team of thieves to help pull off a heist. What's great, is that the whole way through the scene, the robbers are killing each other as the instructed to by the head of the operation which is the Joker. At the end of the scene all of the robbers have killed each other off, hoping for a bigger slice of the loot, but in the end the Joker is the only one left and makes off with all the cash completely unscathed in a line of school bus traffic. Right from the beginning, we get a vividly clear picture that this Joker is clever under his unkempt and unglued facade.
Nicholson's portrayal of the Joker is clean cut in appearance. His make-up heavy and precise in disguise and he struts around in his royal purple suits like he's wearing Gucci. Not Ledger though, his appearance is disheveled, unpolished, and frankly, a mess. His lack of fashion and disregard for his appearance, further adds to his appeal as a crazy villain you love to hate. His make up is messy and dirty. He disguises his scars in a different manner than Nicholson did. Ledger's scars, unlike Napier's were not due to a chemical accident. Ledger's scars were self-inflicted, or so he claims. Through the film, his story of his scars changes. I see his story change as an act of desperation and secret angst. Deep down, I think he wants people to feel bad for him, but at the same time he wants people to see him as crazy and disorderly. In other words, he is a mess of a person, and that's how he likes it.
Ledger's version of the Joker still carries the joking characteristic that Nicholson played. For example, when the Joker is in a "business meeting" with the mob he places a blade on the table and offers a magic trick to make it disappear. He then calls up a person and smashes his face down onto the blade, thus making it disappear. It was magic alright, only it was in a nasty and vile way. Ledger's Joker is completely deranged and is one of those people that "just wants to see the world burn." It appears he really doesn't have a motive, or he's really not trying to get under any certain person's skin. That is what is so disturbing about his character, that he has no motive and is just a heartless, cold, and cruel individual. Through all of his murders and killings, we continue to be enticed by his persona. Thinking the whole way through the movie, what could he possibly pull of next.

Sure Nicholson's role as the joker, was convincingly sinister and comedic; but Ledger's performance carries a cold, and cruel sense of true insanity that keeps us thirsting for more. I smell Oscar!

Learn more about this author, Kelsey Mckernan.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.