Was Jackie Earle Haley's performance as good as Heath Ledger's?

Rorshach vs. the Joker...a question that occurred to me almost immediately after seeing the movie. Was JEH's performance as good as Ledger's acclaimed one?

I think the answer is yes, though he won't even get a nomination of course, even if he dies tragically in a crash with both Olsen twins.



So what do you all think? Are they of the same caliber?

 

Jackie Earle Haley was great, the best thing about The Watchmen film but Heath Ledger showed me something not quite like anything else I'd ever seen before.

 

Every movie and show I've ever seen, at some point during it, I see the actor for the actor. I see through the mask they put on as a character. Always. Without failure. I've never, ever seen a film where I never once got a glimpse of the human beneath, the celebrity, the actor.

Until The Dark Knight and Heath Ledger's Joker. It is the only time I've ever seen a character truly live on screen, and never once get a glimpse of the actor.

I've seen many great performances, but none to that level. So I've got to say, "No, Heath was better" on this one.

 

Jackie Earle Haley's performance was very good, but I don't think it bordered the "great" that Ledger hit with The Joker. The Joker was terrifying, funny, fascinating--his presence dominated the film, even though he wasn't in it for that long. I was immediately drawn in, and I don't even care about super-hero movies all that much. Heath Ledger no longer existed; only The Joker, and it was damned impressive.

I had just seen Jackie Earle Haley in "Little Children" (for which he was nominated) so I was interested to see what he'd do in "The Watchmen." He was good, but I don't think he was "great." I think the fact that his face was completely covered for most of it didn't help either. I think he was certainly one of the best actors in the film, but the constraints of the role didn't give him as much to do. The performance was very good, but was slightly limited in scope.

Jackie is a very talented actor, and I'm pretty sure that he will be nominated again.

 

I thought his uncovered moments were awesome-had he not had the mask on he might have gotten comparable hype to Ledger.

 

while I didn't think Ledger's performance was Oscar-worthy it was absolutely top notch.
Jackie Earle Haley's performance I think was just as good . . . I don't think anyone else could have played Rorschach as true to the book as JEH did. I think he was the best part about Watchmen

 

Maybe he will find their remains been chewed over by a couple of German Shepherds

 

Jackie was great in his role as Rorshach but he was also acting against actors of equal or lesser calibur than he is.

Ledger was great as the Joker but he had to act against more seasoned actors than he is like Bale, Eckhart and especially Oldman. He did it and managed to outshine all of them.

Ledger wins the day.

 

Haley has sure come a long way from Damnation Alley.

 

I'm going to say no. Jackie was pretty great when unmasked.

However, there was no rawness to the "masked" parts of his performance. You couldn't see the eyes, the facial expressions, kind of hard to get truly entranced by that part.

He did have the best performance in Watchmen, but I didn't think the acting in general was particularly extraordinary in Watchmen.

 

Ooh... tough call. IMO, both gave excellent performances. While watching their respective films, I completely thought of them as their characters, and not the actors playing their characters -- but I think Ledger slightly has the edge.

 

It wasn't even close.

Anybody can walk around with a mask on their face and talk in a grumbly voice.

 

I think Haley was certainly great as Rorschach, but I don't feel it was the same kind of caliber as Ledger's performance. Ledger crafted an absolutely iconic film character that completely dominated the film he was in. Like someone said before, there was no Ledger on screen. There was only the Joker. Haley was certainly excellent and easily the best thing about the film, but Ledger made an icon, while Haley simply played a great character.

 

I refuse to choose betwen them. Both were outstanding performances.

 

Heath wins, not by much tough. I give it to him by a nose on his past performances and the diversity Heath had as an actor

Looking forward to seeing more from Jackie Earle Haley

 

I'd call it a tie, since I thought Ledger was extremely overrated in Dark Knight, with only a couple scenes that I felt were really shining and worth the hype.

 

I actually hated Ledgers Joker. Not the performance which I thought was excellent, just the way the character was conceived and written. As for who was better its very close but I would lean toward Ledger. Even with the poor Joker he had to deal with he stepped up and made it his.

 

Heath Ledger created a live action interpretation of the Joker almost entirely from scratch, completely bypassing what all of the other actors had done with the role before him.

JEH was just being accurate & faithful to the source material.

Both were excellent but the Joker gains more points for difficulty.

 

Haley was great. Ledger was better. Apparently he was a method actor much like Brando and DeNiro were in their heydays. It seemed he ate, drank, and breathed the character. Ledger embodied the Joker.

 

I still don't like the face paint. It's predictable and mundane. They could have made him an albino, like Frank Miller did in The Dark Knight Returns. Or they could have just not answered it, like they did in the comics for so long. The Joker needs to be The Joker 24/7. Not take it off whenever he wants to. I usually like the "less is more" approach. But that was something I was willing to suspend my disbelief at.