The Joker - What would you do now?

[T'Baio]

What would you do with the Joker in Nolan's films?

- Ignore him completely and never mention him.
- Have a passing mention.
- Have him referred to a lot.
- Re-cast.
- Using CGI techniques, take deleted scenes and/or unused vocal recordings by Heath Ledger, and with body doubles and vocal impersonations a la' The Crow, have him in the shadows and briefly seen in the film.
- Have him never seen but be a driving force of the plot.
- Any other ideas you might have.

[LutherSloan]

I would leave it to passing references, but that's it. I also doubt that Nolan or anyone else is going to try and one-up a dead man in their own films. There are still enough Batman villains left (albeit not the best ones) to cover without having to have the Joker back on screen through another actor.

[Small White Car]

T'Baio wrote:

---

- Have a passing mention.

This.

[Thrall]

Recast. Gary Oldman thinks Ledger would have wanted them to continue their story without him.

[Bad Bishop]

The Dark Knight didn't dwell on the actions of Ra's al Ghul, so I don't think the Nolan's next Batman film is really required to acknowledge the Joker. Let's just assume Joker's locked up in Arkham. How difficult should it be to introduce a new villain in the next film?

[Reverend]

All you really need to do is have the camera at some point move past a cell door in Arkham, with insane laughter emanating from within and I'd be satisfied.

[Admiral_Young]

I can easily see them making a reference to the Joker's anarchy in the next film and I wouldn't mind if they chose to recast him as well but I doubt that will happen. Just mention himi and the fact that he's currently incarerated in Arkham Aslyum at the moment...hopefully he'll staye there for a while this time lol.

[V]

I would make the Riddler the primary villain of the third film, and have the Joker essentially make a cameo by being on a video-feed from a padded room at Arkham, straight-jacketed, his hair a total mess and just flailing about so you can tell its the Joker, but can't see his face clearly, and you just hear his laughter.

In terms of REFERRING to the Joker, sure, just not on-screen that much: but referring to the events of TDK, sure, why wouldn't they?

My idea is that the Joker's speech about "people don't care about if things go "according to plan", even if the plan is horrifying" is presaging the Riddler just as Gordon presaged the Joker with his escalation speech at the end of BB.

The idea is, the Joker is Batman's antithesis: he represents utter Chaos and Batman represents Order.

But the other great Batman villains take aspects of Batman that make him good, and take it to an extreme that is evil. For example, the dualism they show with Harvey/Twoface, who in the Nolanverse is a vengeful vigilante like Batman, just taking it to the point of murder.

The Riddler represents "Order" taken to a crazed extreme; the Joker wants to destroy civilized order; why would the Riddler do that? Would would understand his riddles if all the libraries burned? No. The Riddler is going to be the reaction to the Joker, just as the Joker was the reaction to Batman.

The Riddler wants Order, his own intricate Order, at any cost. He doesn't care who gets hurt, it's all a game to him. That's the difference; Batman actually cares about people.

Furthermore, as that "Psychology of Batman" special pointed out, he's basically got Narcissistic Personalithy Disorder, like Ted Bundy: a driving need for *attention*, to the point of taunting the police and leaving self-incriminating clues to his crimes.

with the Joker, it wasn't about money, it was about a driving need to destroy all established order (be it the police or even the relative order of the mobsters)

with the Riddler, it's about a driving need for attention, and intricate order

***I envision it as some "Enemy of the State" type thing where the GPD sets up a London-esque CCTV system all over the city, high-tech control of the whole thing....****again, presaged by how Batman destroyed the super-sonar device after he uses it for the extraordinary circumstance of the Joker.

The Riddler is either going to make something similar to that, or the police are and then the Riddler will just hack their computers, and he'll basically turn all of Gotham into his giant video game. Redirecting traffic lights, fooling rival gangs into going to the same bar than killing each other when they meet, hunting Batman with CCTV, etc. (I compare to Enemy of the State, but its also a similar idea to awful recent movie "Eagle Eye")

but the thing is the Riddler just wants attention; and the contrast is that Batman doesn't want praise for what he does, to the point that he would voluntarily take the blame for what Twoface did rather than let Gotham get demoralized.

The ending would be something like the Riddler (on streaming live webcast) is confronted by Batman and the Riddler figures out that Batman couldn't have killed those people and that Harvey did, but that Batman was willing to take the blame. Batman is afraid that everyone will be really demoralized and Gotham will fall apart, but instead, everyone gets so moved that Batman would sacrifice his reputation for Gotham that they find their new hero in Batman.

***Further, Nolan was directly asked "wow, they say Twoface killed 5 people but we don't see him kill that many" (Wuertz, Malloni's driver, probably Malloni, and possibly counting Harvey himself....actually probably not because Gordon wouldn't have included that in the kill count)

but there's one or two people unaccounted for; Nolan acknolwedge this, and said the unrevealed people killed would be a plot point in the third film. Riddler loses someone close to him, then goes nuts? Ultimate Revenge of the Nerds?

[T'Baio]

V wrote:

---

...but there's one or two people unaccounted for; Nolan acknolwedge this, and said the unrevealed people killed would be a plot point in the third film.

Oddly, I've never heard this. Got a source?

[Trekker4747]

I say ignore him. We're only going to do a few of these movies and there's no point in "wasting" them in reusing villans. Passing reference is the most they should do. Move on to other villans.

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Ignore or passing mention.

There's no real need to revisit it. Nolan just doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who would force-feed a continuation of the caharacter after Heath DIED and his LAST PERFORMANCE became iconic.

[T'Baio]

It's not, technically, his last performance.

[JNG]

I think I would like to see the "passing mention" option...or a weighty and meaningful mention that somehow subtly acknowledges not only the real-life loss of the actor but also, and in equal measure, how his performance captured the imagination of so many fans. Something seen as a classy tribute that doesn't call attention to itself.

[T'Baio]

JNG wrote:

---

I think I would like to see the "passing mention" option...or a weighty and meaningful mention that somehow subtly acknowledges not only the real-life loss of the actor but also, and in equal measure, how his performance captured the imagination of so many fans. Something seen as a classy tribute that doesn't call attention to itself.

Something like; "The Joker escaped Arkham and accidentally offed himself in Harley Quinn's apartment?"

[HRHTheKING]

Have one scene where a shadowy Joker played by a new actor briefly tells Batman that he was only the first of many freaks to be attracted to Gotham City merely by the challenge that Batman represents. Batman leaves him laughing in his cell and departs to face the Riddler.

And that's it.