A lot of villains have come and gone, but Heath Ledger's Joker is probably in the Top
5 bad guys that have ever been in a movie.
And now, the buzz is about Jared Leto taking over the role.
People are questioning whether or not he can fill Ledger's shoes, so let's take a moment
to talk about what made Ledger's character so ledgendary, and some places where Leto
could actually pass him up.
Alright first, we tend to chalk up every feeling we have about a character to the actor's performance.
But those feelings come from MANY other places.
An actor can certainly perform believably, but the character has to be WRITTEN with a
consistent and believable personality too.
The Nolans did this with Heath's Joker, giving him a chaotic approach to everything, including
his own face.
On top of that, they understood something deeper.
Writers are often taught that they should have all kinds of backstory for their characters.
But you don't really have to.
What you need is to have a sense of background to what they say and do.
That's what makes them feel real.
And with Ledger's Joker, you never HEAR any of his actual backstory, but there are hints
that there's more to him then we know.
"I hated my father!"
And a HINT of both good and bad traits.
Making him mysterious and interesting, BUT ALSO with believable dimension.
I don't think you could realistically do this better, but Leto's Joker could MATCH this
stuff.
Because a lot of it is well-known characterization.
So let's go further.
Mystery isn't the only thing that draws us to someone.
There's also how able they are as a person.
And this is something that Ledger's character had OVER previous Jokers.
He was YOUNGER, better-looking, had long-hair, and was physically tough.
On top of that, he was clever, fearless, and of course light-hearted.
All of which was specifically shown in what he did.
And those things made us LIKE seeing him.
Unlike, for example, BANE.
Jared Leto has an equally good look, and a lot of the other things are standard Joker
traits, so I'll bet he'll have those too.
BUT, there's other things the filmmakers must do that aren't so obvious.
Like for example, the sounds you hear when a character's on-screen.
"People say, 'Oh Quentin, you were really scary as Richie and everything.'
Well, it's easy when everytime I have my eyelids move, you play this surround sound WHOOSH."
"You know what that whoosh is..."
This applies just as much to the Ledger Joker's theme.
On top of that, a HUGE part of our reaction to a villain is based on what he gets to do.
Looking dangerous means nothing if you don't back it up.
And Heath Ledger's Joker robs banks, burns mountains of money, blows-up buildings, take
over the media, creates Two-Face, and more.
ALL...with essentially no resources.
"Look what I did to this city with a few drums of gas and a couple of bullets."
This makes him seem like an EXTREMELY impactful person.
And, when he does those things, there are some strong ideas involved, which most writers
know as themes.
These make a story intellectually satisfying, but also they give the sense of the character
having greater principles, which makes them seem smarter.
I think the new filmmakers will have to be careful about this if they want Leto's Joker
to approach that level.
Because while explosions are easy to see, the REASON behind them is not, but is just
as important.
Now, as we've said here, our feelings about movies are inseparable from the real world.
And we have to mention Heath Ledger's death.
It was tragic, and left an emotional attachment to his performance that's unmatchable.
But, to even approach that place in people's heart, Leto's character would have to take
on greater significance.
Like if he's the lynchpin of DC's movie universe, and fans associate him with the entire brand.
Otherwise, he's got no chance.
HOWEVER, having said that, nothing's perfect, and there ARE actually spots where Leto's
Joker could actually do BETTER than Ledger's.
Particularly, in how he interacts with Batman.
One of the KEY roles of a villain is to bring out the hero's good traits.
Different villains tend to bring out different ones.
When the hero wins BECAUSE of those traits, we feel emotional confirmation that having
that good trait pays off.
In the Dark Knight, the Joker doesn't do this.
He lets Batman show that he's incorruptible.
"You won't kill me."
But we knew that.
"I won't kill you."
And Batman doesn't get to be active or clever, and at points does nothing but clean up after
the Joker.
"Which one you goin' after?"
"Rachel!"
The people of Gotham, show themselves to be better than the Joker thought, but the Joker
doesn't lose because of that either.
He's defeated because Batman pokes him in the eye.
So like we say the Joker steals the show, but it's not the best result.
Because BATMAN is the one who's supposed to draw us to the next film.
So in that, we have that bit of daylight, where Leto's Joker can potentially give us
more than Heath's, IF they match what was already there.
But given the incredible amount of things that they pulled off with Heath Ledger's character,
that task is no laughing matter.
Thanks.