Still the funniest and most iconic Joker there ever will be. Also the most comic book accurate.
Ledger was decent as the Joker but massively overrated due to his death. And I don't know who the hell Joaquin Phoenix was playing, but it wasn't the Joker. Great performance in general, but he was playing a different character altogether.
haha
shareI agree completely.
sharebut heath ledger was such a smart joker, he blew up hospitals, thats a 300 IQ move bro
shareNicholson was the best Joker for 1980s greed is good decade.
shareCorrect. The best Joker is the one who sold poison on an infomercial and danced to Prince.
shareReplying up here because the thread got too long.
We have a few debates going on here.
Nicholson's Joker being the most comic book accurate, and the amount of laugh time Ledger and Nicholson had. See here I am not side stepping like you do. Now in terms of most comic book accurate I would say it is Hammil's Joker. However you want to omit that because it is animation. Anyway I then even argue Romero is also live action and more comic book accurate than Nicholson's was.
The other one is cultural impact. You lied and said Batman Begins had no cultural impact. I proved that wrong by showcasing the sale of home video and a simple link that cites people in the film industry that acknowledge it's impact and influence on their work. So the question here is did Batman Begins have cultural impact or not? That is the question. The question is not did it have as much as Batman 1989. Batman 1989 had more cultural impact. By your logic since Batman 1989 had more cultural impact that means Batman Begins had none.
By not providing the total time you didn't prove my point wrong. Remember I said it was fairly close in terms of laughter by what you provided with no total time Nicholson has en edge but only slightly. I'm literally gift wrapping this debate to go in your favor and you won't do it. So by what you provided it is close as I said.
shareLmao still desperately trying to cling on to your dignity. Hope that works out for you bud. You got reamed. Accept it and move on.
shareSo you concede then? I'm more than willing to move on I thought I'd offer you the chance to gain some since you never had any. So is that a no then?
shareIt's hilarious how you're trying to convince yourself you didn't get completely stepped on in this debate. Since you want to relive the reamage, here you go -
Are you deaf? The video is chock full of pauses. This is the video which shows all of Ledger's laughs with no pauses - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n8troSSIhU Which is hilarious because you posted it yourself and now you're trying to pretend like it doesn't exist.
That's 1:23 total and that's being generous as the first 15 seconds shouldn't really count but i'll let it pass.
Now for Nicholson's Joker. I'll only add uninterrupted laughter to be fair - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0H5Gy5yNb0 - 1:15 to 1:36, 1:44 to 2:08 (minus 5 seconds for speaking in between), 3:44 to 4:01 and 24 seconds in the mirror scene. That's 1:21 minutes from two scenes alone! Lmao! And i've still got the rest of the movie to play with. Add the laughs from this video and it's a landslide - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmrhC9RS_mM which by the way STILL isn't all the laughs from the movie. What's that? Yeah you just got owned. Again.
They prove that you're a raging fanboy who pretends he's deaf and blind when proven wrong. You said the amount they laugh is about even and you were WRONG. By any standard. Even if you include the Jack Napier screen-time.share
Ledger's uninterrupted laugh time is 1:23 minutes -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n8troSSIhU
Nicholson's laugh time equals this in just 2 scenes. And I didn't even include this scene
-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvDPqvOYz7c
Which includes another 1 whole minute of uninterrupted laugh time. So that's bordering on 2 and a half minutes and i've still got the compilation video to play with. Lmao it's not even remotely close.
All you gotta do is give the total time. What is it? I'm honestly asking.
shareCalculate it yourself bud. I've already won the argument so it's not worth the effort.
shareNo actually if that were so you'd jump at the chance to do it. Funny how you want people to admit to something but you won't hold yourself to that same standard.
shareYou lost dude. Have a little dignity for God's sake. I am honestly embarrassed on your behalf.
shareOk let's play your game. All I need to do is say you lost. I won you lost.
shareExcept I provided unequivocal evidence. You didn't. You're seriously boring me.
shareSo did I with facts about cultural impact. Lol you had no retort.
shareYou don't get to move on to another topic if you can't concede the first. Like I said, if you're going to deny 1+1=2 you're not worth arguing with.
shareNope fair is fair. I don't humor people who don't play by their own rules.
shareNothing? Yep ok concession noted.
shareLOL i've ruined your life haven't I? You've been thoroughly dismantled buddy. It's over until you can concede factual statements.
shareOnce you concede to facts then we can talk. I'm holding you to a standard also. Are you a hypocrite?
share