Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

If joker hadn't been in TDK, and it had just been two face...would TDK have done as well as it did, would it have flopped or would it have been like batman begins and done ok but not great?

no

So you think it woulda flopped?

I don't think it would have flopped, but Joker lent a lot to it... Ledger's performance is iconic, so that definitely helped, and the Ledger hype made huge deal, in my town, at least... Some people were like "Batman's kinda for kids, but I'm a HUGE fan of Heath Ledger..." And the girls at my school were like "I hate Batman, but Heath Ledger is SO cute..." So Ledger's presence really increased the ticket sales, imo...

But I think it would have done slightly better than Begins had Joker been for some reason absent (wouldn't have happened, though)...

It definitely would have been successful but not nearly as much as it has been, that's for sure.

Isn't it kinda bad that TDK got alot of success due to joker or should it be seen as a good thing?

Originally posted by steverules
So you think it woulda flopped? lol no, im saying it wouldnt have done as good as it did

Originally posted by steverules
Isn't it kinda bad that TDK got alot of success due to joker or should it be seen as a good thing? well seeing as the joker is apart of the whole batman thing...

its a good thing of course..

thats like saying the first one only did good cause batman was in it...

It definitely should be seen as a good thing that the Joker was instrumental in the enormous profit of The Dark Knight.

Why should it be seen as a bad thing?

No I think one of the reasons that Batman 1989 and the Dark Knight are the two most successful movies of the Batman franchises is because everyone wants to see Batman versus the Joker. That is the most epic battle in the comic book industry in my opinion and it seems that it always will be. I think no matter how many times the Batman series may go through reboots even in the future the biggest Batman movies will always be the ones where he has to deal with the Joker because I think the Joker is Batman's most popular villain, and a popular villain period in his own right. People love to see him.

Did that older movie do well? The one where he took on all his big villains and had...shark repellent

The Joker is the most popular villain in history so no, it wouldn't have been as successful.

Joker definitely played a big part of Batman doing so well, just like Heath Ledger's death played a small part in it.

So is batman 3 basically going to do the same as BB or do they need to re-cast joker in order for no.3 to be a success?

They need to leave Joker out of the movie in order for it to be a success.

Long answer yes with an 'if'.

Short answer no with a 'but'.

Even I'm confused about what you're talking about.

Sure it would have...Joker was the biggest part of the plot.

How can 3 be a success without joker...did batman returns do well without joker? I remember batman forever and batman and robin were terrible...BB was an ok film

Originally posted by steverules
How can 3 be a success without joker...did batman returns do well without joker? I remember batman forever and batman and robin were terrible...BB was an ok film

Yes, Batman Returns did well.

i think that as long as they keep putting good actors as the villains and the scripts are really good and the keep the main cast the same like batman,Alfred, Gordan, and two face they can still do pretty good

If Batman returns can do well then couldn't TDK have done well...what is it that wouldn't have made it any better than if joker hadn't been in it. Is Two face just not a good villain on his own? In Batman forever he teamed with Riddler...and now TDK...two face again was not alone.

Originally posted by steverules
If joker hadn't been in TDK, and it had just been two face...would TDK have done as well as it did, would it have flopped or would it have been like batman begins and done ok but not great?


Yes, unequivocally, absolutely yes

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
Yes, unequivocally, absolutely yes

I dunno what your saying yes to....I really shoulda made a poll

Originally posted by steverules
If Batman returns can do well then couldn't TDK have done well...what is it that wouldn't have made it any better than if joker hadn't been in it. Is Two face just not a good villain on his own? In Batman forever he teamed with Riddler...and now TDK...two face again was not alone.

i think its usually just who the actors are and who the writer/director is Tommy lee Jones wouldn't have in any selection for me to play two face and that was one of the Joel schumacher film so just him as director makes it suck

Originally posted by steverules
I dunno what your saying yes to....I really shoulda made a poll


'm saying that The Dark Knight was going to be successful irregardless of who was being cast. The story was excellent, the acting great and the action scenes soooooooooo great.

Yeah he sucked as two face...I forget the actor who played harvey/two face in TDK but I think he did a good job and had TDK been just two face then you never know it may have actually turned out great. I mean TDK was great with Heath as joker, he really did do a good job and he took the joker character to a whole new level...but I do think maybe TDK still coulda been a possible success.

Eh, no, most people are going to see TDK because of Heath Ledger alone, so if he wasn't in it, then I doubt it'd be breaking records everyday.

Originally posted by Da Joker
Eh, no, most people are going to see TDK because of Heath Ledger alone, so if he wasn't in it, then I doubt it'd be breaking records everyday.

I'm not saying it would have been as successful as it is now....but it still may have been a success with just two face...he makes for a good villain and he's one of the famous ones.

...(I forget the actor who played Harvey/two face in TDK but I think he did a good job and had TDK been just two face then you never know it may have actually turned out great).

The actor is Aaron Eckhart i thought he did really good too a film with just him as villain would probably have done as well as batman begins but nowhere as much as TDK

So no.3 could turn out to be like no.1...I mean without joker who's gonna wanna see part 3? I mean I know I will but are people gonna be interested with no joker? I mean from what I know there isn't gonna be a re-casting

The general consensus is that people would rather wait until another series for another Joker.

I doubt there will be another series for a while So no joker till then, if it is ever re-started again

Of course it wouldn't have done as well. The Joker is one of Batman's most iconic villains, and the way in which the role was approached was nothing short of glorious.

Originally posted by steverules
If joker hadn't been in TDK, and it had just been two face...would TDK have done as well as it did, would it have flopped or would it have been like batman begins and done ok but not great?

What a ridiculous (and pointless) proposition!

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
What a ridiculous (and pointless) proposition!

What a ridiculous (and pointless) post!

I wouldn't have gone to see TDK if the Joker/Ledger wasn't in it, because I think Begins sucks ass. I fell asleep watching it the first time in theaters and then I saw it again a few weeks later and it was just incredibly boring. I really did prefer the over-the-top zany'ness and good humor that was in Batman '89 and Batman Forever, actually.

Originally posted by steverules
What a ridiculous (and pointless) post!

Woah, I see what you did there. Sophisticated!

Let me preempt your next thread: Would Titanic have been so successful without the iceberg?

Or:

Would The Shawshank Redemption have been so popular without the prison?

Getting the point yet, are ye?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Woah, I see what you did there. Sophisticated!

Let me preempt your next thread: Would Titanic have been so successful without the iceberg?

Or:

Would The Shawshank Redemption have been so popular without the prison?

Getting the point yet, are ye?

Not really since firstly titanic was real life and not having an ice berg would make no sense...shawshank redemption needed a prison for a guy who was being arrested...TDK without joker woulda still had Two face

http://jessenoller.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/vader-fail.jpg

Originally posted by steverules
Not really since firstly titanic was real life and not having an ice berg would make no sense...shawshank redemption needed a prison for a guy who was being arrested...TDK without joker woulda still had Two face

http://jessenoller.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/vader-fail.jpg

Oh, I'm sorry; I thought I was communicating with an adult, not a retarded 12 year old (dog).

a retarded 12 year old (dog)? Uhm...ok...didn't know that most dogs weren't retarded anyway....guess you didn't, which isn't your fault...it's your mothers, your clearly the result of a mother who was on crack whilst pregnant
http://weblogs.elearning.ubc.ca/vschools/fail.jpg
So now if you don't mind we can move on

Originally posted by steverules
a retarded 12 year old (dog)? Uhm...ok...didn't know that most dogs weren't retarded anyway....guess you didn't, which isn't your fault...it's your mothers, your clearly the result of a mother who was on crack whilst pregnant
http://weblogs.elearning.ubc.ca/vschools/fail.jpg
So now if you don't mind we can move on

Haha, it becomes clearer with every post you make that I'm obviously speaking at a level beyond your comprehension. However, I'm a firm believer in helping those less mentally able than most, so let me try a new tack:

Woof-woof, awoooo...woof! Woof?

Originally posted by steverules
If joker hadn't been in TDK, and it had just been two face...would TDK have done as well as it did, would it have flopped or would it have been like batman begins and done ok but not great?

Assuming the Joker wasn't in it, the story would have (had to be) been completely different, so it's possible that it could have been just as good or even better. Anyone that can't accept this as possibility is a senseless buffoon.

This is of course doing away with the silly notion that Ledger's performance was the pinnacle of acting as some want to believe.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Haha, it becomes clearer with every post you make that I'm obviously speaking at a level beyond your comprehension. However, I'm a firm believer in helping those less mentally able than most, so let me try a new tack:

Woof-woof, awoooo...woof! Woof?

Wow....just....wow

http://slapfish.com/failure/failure0400.jpg

Originally posted by Robtard
Assuming the Joker wasn't in it, the story would have (had to be) been completely different, so it's possible that it could have been just as good or even better. Anyone that can't accept this as possibility is a senseless buffoon.

This is of course doing away with the silly notion that Ledger's performance was the pinnacle of acting as some want to believe.

Woulda been interesting to see how two face coulda done being the only villain in TDK...I am glad joker was in it and Ledger did a good joker, still like I said...woulda been interesting to see what two face woulda done had he been the main villain.

Guys, let's cut back on the attacks.

My answer, yes...if you're talking about success in delivering a good story. Then yes, it would have.

Batman Begins didn't make a lot of money because of certain factors.

1. Fans and movie goers still had the bad taste in their mouths from Batman and Robin.

2. Poor marketing and advertising.

3. At the time of Batman Begins was competing with Episode III.

Nolan's Batman got mostly recognize once the film got to dvd and was on cable tv. One thing led to another and when the sequel came out...well, you know the rest.

Hard to tell, the movie would've taken a completely different turn, it still may have been good, but without Ledger it would be found lacking.

Blax I am glad I'm not the only one who thought Begins was dry. I liked it and respected it for reviving Batman in a respectable manner but really I thought the movie was lacking in a few areas

I believe yes The Dark Knight still have been successful. Batman Begins was in the right direction and was very good. But when it was announced that a sequel was coming I was very very excited, because I knew it was going to be better. When Heath Ledger was casted I started to think how a very talented actor like he is/was that this movie was going to be great. Now I knew The Dark Knight was going to make money, but I had no idea it was going to set records right and left. The next comes on sunday when this will become the fastedt movie (10 days) to reach $300 million dollar domestically.

The joker card at the end of begins more a less implied that the joker was gonna be in the sequel

Originally posted by steverules
The joker card at the end of begins more a less implied that the joker was gonna be in the sequel


Yes it did. Tis truly shameful that we will not see The Joker again.

Would it had been successful? Yes
Would it had been as successful? No

We are talking about one of the most iconic duels in comic history... Batman vs Joker. That is what has made the movie successful. Heath Ledger role as the Joker has pushed the movie into the record breaking atmosphere.

It it was not for the added push, it would have still been a major hit because of the Joker, but not a record breaking movie.

Originally posted by Joseph_Kerr
Would it had been successful? Yes
Would it had been as successful? No

We are talking about one of the most iconic duels in comic history... Batman vs Joker. That is what has made the movie successful. Heath Ledger role as the Joker has pushed the movie into the record breaking atmosphere.

It it was not for the added push, it would have still been a major hit because of the Joker, but not a record breaking movie. You cannot be any more clearer than this statement..

Agreed 100%

If Heath didn't do the Joker this way, I doubt it'd be breaking records the way it is.

Honestly I think The Dark Knight was bound to break a few records anyway just based on the hype. And I think Nolan would have had the Joker done a similar way, but maybe not as well if he had another actor. I think the Heath Ledger hype added to it but I still think the Batman versus Joker epic was always destined for greatness.

Yep, and when it happens in the next series, hopefully it'll be just as good as this time.

Originally posted by Robtard
That takes the stance that no one else but Ledger playing the joker would have made the movie great, which is rediculous. It could have been great without the Joker altogether, just would have had to been different. It's certainly possible someone else could have done an equal or greater job with the Joker role.
I don't think it's ridiculous in the least to say Ledger is the only one who could've pulled off the role the way he did, I think some people are perfect for certain roles, Ledger was perfect for the Joker, Harrison Ford was perfect for Han Solo and Indiana Jones, Arnold Schwarzenegger was perfect for the Terminator, and Sean Connery was perfect for Captain Marko Ramius. There are tons of cases like this in my opinion and I honestly believe that Heath Ledger is one of them.

Originally posted by Robtard
That is until someone else comes along and does a better job.
Believe what you will, but I don't think it's going to happen, if you think I'm an idiot for believing that then let me live in ignorant bliss.

I think Ledger was perfect for the role as it intended by Nolan however I can't say no one could have done it better even though I am hard pressed to imagine it happening

Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
I think Ledger was perfect for the role as it intended by Nolan however I can't say no one could have done it better even though I am hard pressed to imagine it happening

I can't think of anyone currently who could do it just like that either. A younger Brad Pitt, maybe, he did play a great psycho in 12 Monkeys and Kalifornia, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Originally posted by Robtard
I can't think of anyone currently who could do it just like that either. A younger Brad Pitt, maybe, he did play a great psycho in 12 Monkeys and Kalifornia, but I wouldn't bet on it.

young brad pitt psycho in 12 monkeys, he had a similar performance in Fight Club in my opinion. the same quirkiness

Originally posted by Robtard
I don't think you're an idiot, just suffering from 'TDK syndrome'.

I remember when it was first announced that Ledger was cast as the Joker in the Batman Begins sequel, many a person said "he'll never be able to live up to Nicholson's role", because up to that point Nicholson had arguably done the best Joker and it was imaginable that Ledger, a young actor with little under his belt could match or top it. See my point?

Ledger did do a great Joker though and the fact that this was his last role would be a hard act to follow for any would be future Jokers.
I didn't think Nicholson was all that great personally, and if I still think Connery is the perfect Bond, I know I won't change my mind on this, but I do get what you're saying.

I thought Nicholson's portrayal of the Joker before then was iconic, it was definitely one of the most memorable portrayals of a villain in a comic book movie for a long time whether people were thrilled with it as fans or not. And a lot of people didn't think it could be done better. But now we know that it can. I'm not gonna say no one can do a better version in the future either cuz there's no way to know that.

Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
I think Ledger was perfect for the role as it intended by Nolan however I can't say no one could have done it better even though I am hard pressed to imagine it happening


I agree

Originally posted by steverules
Isn't it kinda bad that TDK got alot of success due to joker or should it be seen as a good thing?

Why would that be bad?

Is it bad that some of the success of James Bond films is due to hot vehicles, hotter women, cool gadgets and exotic locations?

Is it bad that Harry Potter books get a lot of their cache from fantastic forays into the world of magic meshed in with a school-life that is beyond the norm?

Is it bad that X-men comics get additional velocity from Wolverine being a member of the X-men?

No person with sense would see TDK getting an extra level of success from the Joker as 'bad' (unless it is someone with an agenda). After all, the Joker is part and parcel of DC, is even more a part of the Batman mythos than Robin and Nightwing are, and is the main cerebral antagonist to the Batman protagonist.

The Joker obviously added to TDK, and Heath Ledger's performance obviously added a lot to the JOKER (imagine if Schumaker was directing instead of Nolan, and he had included someone like Jim Carey in the role ....)

Which goes to show something very important, the success of TDK was not BECAUSE of the Joker, or because of Heath Ledger.

What that character, and the actor (Heath), did is make something great become greater. However, TDK would still have been a great movie.

Why?

Because it was the script, the cast (not just one member), and the directing that was superb. A bad plot, even IF it INCLUDED the Joker (and Heath as the Joker), would have made the movie bomb.

A GREAT PLOT, even if it did not have the Joker (and Heath) would have led to a great movie.

Now, the Joker (and Heath as the character) obviously added a lot of oomph, but the reason the movie did well (and was a great movie) is because it had a great plot, overall cast, and directorship.

Give Schumaker (the guy who directed movies such as Batman and Robin) Heath Ledger (assuming he was alive), and have Schumaker make a film, and I can bet you cash-money it would have been HORRIBLE, with Batman wearing ice-skates and the Joker playing a banjo ....or something equally ridiculous!

Thus, a person like Schumaker, even with the Joker character and Heath Ledger as the Joker, would have made a really HORRID movie.

Which goes to show (whatever your agenda is), that it is the PLOT/SCRIPT, the CAST, and the DIRECTORSHIP that make or break a movie. Add a great BUDGET and MARKETING to the above, and the movie will do very very well.

Give Schumaker Heath Ledger in a Joker costume, and you will just end up with Heath Ledger, in a Joker costume, acting in a HORRIBLE movie.