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

The joker about whom i refer is the antagonist from the move :The Dark Knight versus hannibal lecter.

both are clever and have taken many lives in thier respective fields. given thier twisted nature i have 3 levels i want to measure from each of them.


1) who is more morally depraved?

2) who is more clever/ ingenious?

3) who wins in a fight ( weapons tactics and all)?

1 Joker
2 A tough call
3 Joker

1. Joker.

2. Probably Joker.

3. Well Hannibal is a strong swordsman, but with his age and the fact that he hasn't practiced in years he may not beat Joker...I really don't know.

Joker takes 1 and 3. The second one I see as a stalemate. I think it would depend on who can get into each other's head more.

1. Joker.
2. Lecter. Lecter shows some nice foresight just like Joker but he's also a doctor...so I give the edge to Lecter.
3. Joker.

I find cannibalism more "morally depraved". Joker just kills people with more "normal" ways. Eating someone else is just more f'ed up IMO.

BTW, he also cut open someone's skull while leaving them alive in Hannibal.

Originally posted by Placidity
I find cannibalism more "morally depraved". Joker just kills people with more "normal" ways. Eating someone else is just more f'ed up IMO.

BTW, he also cut open someone's skull while leaving them alive in Hannibal.

Actually, I believe the Joker can do all acts that Hannibal does... but won't because it won't be 'fun' or 'funny'.

Originally posted by dadudemon
2. Lecter. Lecter shows some nice foresight just like Joker but he's also a doctor...so I give the edge to Lecter. Like how he foresaw being handcuffed to a fridge along with the chick(can't remember name)? Or was cutting off his own hand part of his plan?

1) I will say Hannibal, because he eats people. I wouldn't consider liking fine wine and Beethoven redeeming qualities for someone like that. At least The Joker has no alter-ego: he's not a mild-mannered shrink by day and a nutcase by night. He's always the Joker.

2)That's a hard call. I will say the Joker. He reminds me of the Emperor from Star Wars; he's a master manipulator of people and at highly complex schemes. Hannibal is more lowkey, and avoids the limelight, and he likes it that way. They're both highly intelligent like most serial killers, but I think Hannibal is the smarter of the two. The Joker always has to be a showman and I think that compromises some of his craftiness.

3) Whether a knife fight or a gun fight, I think the Joker would win. Hannibal is a predator and a torturer, but he's no warrior.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
1) I will say Hannibal, because he eats people. I wouldn't consider liking fine wine and Beethoven redeeming qualities for someone like that. At least The Joker has no alter-ego: he's not a mild-mannered shrink by day and a nutcase by night. He's always the Joker.

2)That's a hard call. I will say the Joker. He reminds me of the Emperor from Star Wars; he's a master manipulator of people and at highly complex schemes. Hannibal is more lowkey, and avoids the limelight, and he likes it that way. They're both highly intelligent like most serial killers, but I think Hannibal is the smarter of the two. The Joker always has to be a showman and I think that compromises some of his craftiness.

3) Whether a knife fight or a gun fight, I think the Joker would win. Hannibal is a predator and a torturer, but he's no warrior.

Well said.

1) Hannibal - only slightly, he's a cannibal and he feeds someone sauteed pieces of their own brain. Gets people to mangle themselves etc.
2) Hannibal - very similar to the joker, but he seems to be better at mind-****ing, again, if only slightly. Not solid on this one though.
3) Joker - he has shown better fighting prowess, from the pencil scene to taking the cop in the interrogation cell hostage.

Edit: That would be an interesting scene, having the Batman go to Hannibal for information, only to be psychoanalized and mind-****ed by him.

*Hannibal voice* "Was your father never there Batman, a shadow of a figure in your life? Did he sodomize you? Do tell."

Due to his work background, I can agree Hannibal is a little better at getting in your head, but in terms of planning or scheming I would say Joker is better.

But the question was who is more morally depraved. Lecter has morals and standards, despite being a cannibal. The Joker has none. So while we can all agree that eating another human being's body parts is more repungnant to us than anything we've seen the Joker do, I think the overall scale is still tipped in the Joker's favor. That is a reasoned opinion, not just me being an annoying fan of the Dark Knight.

Joker
Dunno
Joker

Originally posted by Devil King
But the question was who is more morally depraved. Lecter has morals and standards, despite being a cannibal. The Joker has none. So while we can all agree that eating another human being's body parts is more repungnant to us than anything we've seen the Joker do, I think the overall scale is still tipped in the Joker's favor. That is a reasoned opinion, not just me being an annoying fan of the Dark Knight.

You do bring up a valid point with Lector having morals and standards and I'm inclined to agree with you now. But how do we know that that Joker absolutely doesn't have his own code, as Hannibal?

Granted, he had no qualms over blowing up a boat filled with men, women and children, but are you certain he wouldn't help an elderly lady cross the street or give a homeless man a dollar?

Originally posted by Robtard
but are you certain he wouldn't help an elderly lady cross the street or give a homeless man a dollar?

No. But there's a very good chance the dollar will explode and the old lady will end up in front of a speeding car.

Originally posted by Devil King
No. But there's a very good chance the dollar will explode and the old lady will end up in front of a speeding car.

That's pure unfiltered evil.

I kinda wanna give Hannibal the first one, but the Joker has no rules...then again Hannibal eats people so I'd say for the first one it's a tie but for the second and third Joker all the way.

Unlike the Joker, Hannibal can be sympathic. He has a whole lot more good sides than the Joker. To the Joker, everything is a game. Even death.

1. Joker
2. Depends
3. Joker

I think he'd have the time of his life if he died and went to Hell.

Originally posted by Da Joker
I think he'd have the time of his life if he died and went to Hell.

That wouldnt really be considered the time of his "life" though.

He'd probably end up tricking the devil and taking over hell. Lolz.

Anyway, for the sake of this thread, I'm not too sure of who should win 1 and 2. Both the Joker and Lecter are incredibly intelligent, twisted lunatics- but the Joker at least seems more outright insane, without any sort of morals or 'rules'. He sees death- even his own- as a complete joke. That being said, though, Hannibal's actions (the whole brain scene, for instance) are considerably more grotesque than the Joker's own, who simply kills people in 'normal' ways and occasionally mutilates them to a minor degree (the smiles). So, I can't really tell. Intelligence? Well, the Joker seems craftier and has a penchant for superior plans and unpredictability, but Hannibal is a doctor with plenty of psychological knowledge. Tough, once again.

Fight ability, though, it's the Joker for the win. He displayed overall superior fighting prowess, both with guns and with knives. He wins here.

1 Joker
2 Lecter
3 Lecter

I think hannable would win he is bad but just like the Joker he thinks ahead of time but hannable knows your body parts

It's Hannibal, for one, and he's no where near as vile as the Joker, at least in my eyes. Both are incredibly smart, but the Joker is a whole level ahead of Hannibal.

Originally posted by Da Joker
It's Hannibal, for one, and he's no where near as vile as the Joker, at least in my eyes. Both are incredibly smart, but the Joker is a whole level ahead of Hannibal.

Are you serious? Did you watch the same movies? Shooting people, cutting cheeks and laying out plans is more vile than eating a human being and his serial killings?

Hannibal ate from a man while he was still living and awake. He opened the head of another and ate pieces of the brain while the man was living and awake. Joker may be twisted, but Hannibal sure is too.

What makes me not 100% certain about the nomination of Hannibal is the fact that he has a couple of good sides. Unlike Joker, who sees everything as a "joke" and kills for the sake of killing. Hannibal's murders often serve a higher purpose (Like eating, or something that benefit himself)

Originally posted by Scythe
Are you serious? Did you watch the same movies? Shooting people, cutting cheeks and laying out plans is more vile than eating a human being and his serial killings?

Damn, I forgot this was movie Joker...

Both are incredibly vile, but I think the Joker still has an edge. That's not saying Hannibal is to be taken lightly.

1. Joker

2. Joker

3. Joker

Originally posted by Da Joker
Both are incredibly vile, but I think the Joker still has an edge.

Sigh...

Joker has nothing on Lecter. Nothing he's done can be compared to what Hannibal has done, but that's okay, you're forgiven.

Originally posted by Obsidian Fury
Hannibal ate from a man while he was still living and awake. He opened the head of another and ate pieces of the brain while the man was living and awake. Joker may be twisted, but Hannibal sure is too.

What makes me not 100% certain about the nomination of Hannibal is the fact that he has a couple of good sides. Unlike Joker, who sees everything as a "joke" and kills for the sake of killing. Hannibal's murders often serve a higher purpose (Like eating, or something that benefit himself)

Joker has no good side.

That's why I'd give him the 1st. Sure, Hannibal may be a cannibal, but being a cannibal alone is not something I find enough a reason for him to top Joker. With the exception of cannibalism, there isnt anything Hannibal does that Joker wouldnt be able to do.

Hannibal is smart, but Joker has done some pretty incredible things trough the years . That's why I'd give him the 2nd.

If Joker would get a chance to prepare for the battle, the 3rd would be his easily. However, Hannibal has shown incredible strength and willpower. I wouldnt be surprised if he could kick Joker's ass if no preparation was given. Then again, Joker has been able to hold his own against Batman, and has shown some pretty skillful fighting moves.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Joker has had 60 years of comic history, while Lecter has had a few movies. Right, Lector is just much more villainous than the Joker.

Originally posted by Da Joker
Correct me if I'm wrong but the Joker has had 60 years of comic history, while Lecter has had a few movies. Right, Lector is just much more villainous than the Joker.

Still movie Joker...

Who I've admitted isn't exactly as vile as Lecter, but is almost up there.

Aww, Bardock took the fun out of it for me, but might as well.

Originally posted by Da Joker
Correct me if I'm wrong but the Joker has had 60 years of comic history, while Lecter has had a few movies. Right, Lector is just much more villainous than the Joker.

You're failing to understand that this is movie Joker we're talking about, comics have nothing to do in the movie Vs. Forums, not that hard to comprehend, and it's okay, you are corrected.

Originally posted by Da Joker
Who I've admitted isn't exactly as vile as Lecter, but is almost up there.

Actually, Joker has no remorse whatsoever in the movies, Lecter has stated that he kills only those he views as unpleasant, though, those in more vile ways than Joker did as of yet. So, Joker wins that for me.

I actually didn't know that. It's been a while since I've seen some of the films. That's for that bit of info.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
1 Joker
2 Lecter
3 Lecter

I can see why you would give Lecter the 'smarts' contests, but the actual fighting one? What makes you say that?

What with Lecter being an old man, I doubt he can beat Joker in a fight, who was able to physically overpower a fairly large cop and hold hostage.

If this was young Lecter with a sword, the fight might be different.

The Joker isn't anywhere near as smart.

Of course he would beat Lecter in a fight though.

Off topic: Lecter doesn't just have "a few movies". He was first brought to life in 1981. The books came before the movies.

-AC

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
I can see why you would give Lecter the 'smarts' contests, but the actual fighting one? What makes you say that?

I was assuming that this was a bout between the two during their Prime. We have never seen the Joker display any kind of exceptional fighting ability or knowledge. Hannibal Rising did a lot to portray Hannibal as a calm calculating killer that knows how to wield a sword. Hannibal is also extensively trained in the physiology of humans. He has often applied his awareness of the human body to his killings and torturings. combined with that knowledge and his skill with a sword, i think it would be a devastating combo.

The Joker has displayed the ability to actually defeat people (TRAINED people) in straight-up combat; remember the cop in the interrogation scene? The Joker pisses him off, and the next time we see the cop, he has his arm twisted behind his back and a knife to his throat. He also quickly and easily (displaying amazing reflexes) twisted a mobster's hand behind his back and slammed him, so the pencil on the table jams percisely into his eye and into his skull.

He also held off Batman in one on one combat. I'd love to see Hannibal, with any sort of advantage, do that.

Originally posted by Robtard
*Hannibal voice* "Was your father never there Batman, a shadow of a figure in your life? Did he sodomize you? Do tell."

Freakin' brilliant. I was thinking along similar lines, except your quote hit the nail right on the head.

thumbsup

ragesRemorse...

Agree. A LOT.

Batman would just punch him. >_>

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Batman would just punch him. >_>

And punch him hard.

Why is Lecter automatically smarter than Joker?

In terms of knowledge, sure, Lecter may be superior.

But in terms of planning, and scheming, Joker was superior IMO.

Due to that I say they are about equal.

Just about.

What about physically? Can someone tell me if Hannibal is just as much of a fighter as TDK Joker? It's been a little bit since I've watched the movies.

Old Hannibal? No, I doubt it.

Young Hannibal however was a competant swordsman and was physically fairly fit.

Oh yeah, I know, I saw that movie last year and remember it, but I was referring to the older Hannibal. Young Hannibal, in a fist fight, would give the Joker a run for his money, but the Joker still has a small advantage since he doesn't give a damn about pain. Old Hannibal has probably lost most of those skills and would lose quicker than his younger self.

Sound about right?

Originally posted by Master Crimzon


He also held off Batman in one on one combat. I'd love to see Hannibal, with any sort of advantage, do that.

im sure hannibal lecter could

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
im sure hannibal lecter could

I'm not.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The Joker isn't anywhere near as smart.

-AC

He may or may not be. But I believe that was not the question. Lecter hasn't really shown the elaborate planning and plotting that Joker has.

Plus, the Joker overpowered Batman at the end. The only reason Batsy was able to hit him with the batarangs and toss him over was because he was distracted. But before then he was holding that ledge or whatever down on him with ease.

There are many forms of being smart. There are many ways to think and use intelligence. While Lecter has the lead in some ways, the Joker has the lead in other ways. My point: They are both smart in different ways.

Nicely put.

But yeah. Young Lecter could, I'm sure, give TDK Joker an excellent fight and possibly win somewhere between 4 to 5 times out of 10, but old Lecter doesn't stand a chance in hell.

Originally posted by Bardock42
He may or may not be. But I believe that was not the question. Lecter hasn't really shown the elaborate planning and plotting that Joker has.

"Do I look like a guy with a plan?".

He doesn't plan things, he just happens to make the best of whatever chaos he brings about. Organised chaos is not like having a plan.

-AC

His actions betray his words though. One example would be the boat scene, he planned on one boat blowing away the other, he also planned ahead by carrying a detonator that would blow both in case they didn't. That wasn't random.

Yeah, the Joker was pretty much lying to Harvey about that, or so it would seem...

Or maybe we just shouldn't try to understand him. He's wierd.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
"Do I look like a guy with a plan?".

He doesn't plan things, he just happens to make the best of whatever chaos he brings about. Organised chaos is not like having a plan.

-AC

His plan was to convert Harvey. He was pushing his buttons. Joker do have a plan, he just does not admit it to the person involved in it.

1.) probably the Joker. He's goddamned ruthless. He is the kind that will shoot your head if he doens't like your clothes or your hair. or if you are playing a game and he doesn't like it, he will kill you. He doens't give a heck about life. He will just kill or destroy to satisfy himself..or will he be ever satisfied. Lector's pretty ****ing crazy with the way he kills his victim. But he still acts like a doc in the morning..so yeah. BTW, Joker will blow him self up with his enemy if he thinks he needs to.

2.) As far as being clever, I still give that to Joker. You saw how he planned to be caught and escape. THat's pretty smart. Lector's also fuking smart, but broadcasting your self to the media and not getting caught is different.

3.) You shouldn't have asked...
Joker is one of the very few Batman's human enemy that can withstand hand to hand combat with him for quite a time. Joker is also master of bombs, chemicals, engineering, and guns. Lector's good with the swords, but he is no match for Joker. Joker's tatics to destroy hospitals, crash into parties, getting caught and blowing up...Joker just has too much for Lector.

Originally posted by Bardock42
He may or may not be. But I believe that was not the question. Lecter hasn't really shown the elaborate planning and plotting that Joker has.

Yes he has. Maybe not on such a grand scale as the Joker but Lecter never had the ambition to prove a point to the world. This shouldn't suggest that he couldn't. The Joker spread fear through out an entire city because that's what he wanted to accomplish. Lecter spread fear through out the nation by sheer happenstance. Lecter has proven that he can manipulate just about any person and situation. Unlike the Joker, Lecters' plans always reach fruition and unfold exactly how he plans. The Joker doesn't understand people nearly as well as Lecter.

frusty Darn, I should have done a search before making my thread. Though I suppose I made it different enough, maybe...

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Yes he has. Maybe not on such a grand scale as the Joker but Lecter never had the ambition to prove a point to the world. This shouldn't suggest that he couldn't. The Joker spread fear through out an entire city because that's what he wanted to accomplish. Lecter spread fear through out the nation by sheer happenstance. Lecter has proven that he can manipulate just about any person and situation. Unlike the Joker, Lecters' plans always reach fruition and unfold exactly how he plans. The Joker doesn't understand people nearly as well as Lecter. The absence of proof is not proof of absence argment? Fail.

He can't for the simple fact he has not proven to be able to.

Joker manipulated an entire city to his will, and in the end he in a way "won," he proved that the best of people could become just like him, and he forced Batman to kill someone.

Originally posted by ThunderGodEneru
The absence of proof is not proof of absence argment? Fail.

He can't for the simple fact he has not proven to be able to.

Joker manipulated an entire city to his will, and in the end he in a way "won," he proved that the best of people could become just like him, and he forced Batman to kill someone.

absence of proof? I'm not stating anything that isn't reinforced by the material in the movies. Lecter never had the type of ambition that the Joker had so, we cannot say what he could and couldn't accomplish if he were compelled to convey a pointless and redundant message. What we do know about Lecter, however, is that his goals always involve elaborate schemes that are elaborately planned. The same can be said about the Joker but i really have a problem in believing this. In TDK he relied to much on luck.

The difference between the Joker and Lecter is that Lecters goals are always self centered. There is no chaos involved in his goals. They are intricately plotted. The Jokers' goals involved using chaos to spread the message of chaos. As we know, Chaos is unpredictable. This is why the Joker failed.

I'm still yet to be convinced that the Joker accomplished anything other than murder and destruction. He didn't force Batman to kill anyone. He forced Batman to choose who he was going to pursue. Batman can't be in two places at once. Had the Joker not given Batman the wrong address it is very possible that the police would have made it to Dent in time. I really don't know how Batman was forced to kill. He didn't kill anyone.

I don't even see how the Joker proved that anyman can become like him. Isn't it common knowledge that every man has his breaking point? I didn't see anyone in the movie arguing otherwise. Dent snapped, yeah, but he didn't become like the Joker in the least bit. He wasn't going around murdering innocent people and spread senseless chaos. He was merely seeking revenge. The Joker may have helped to cause that by burning his face off and killing his fiance but it could have been anyman who pushed Dent to that breaking point. If all the joker proved is that everyman has their breaking point, well, that's pretty lame. I could have told everyone that The Joker failed, partner. The only thing he ever accomplished was murder and mayhem. Any nut with a gun can do that. Lecter, on the other hand changed lives on a deep profound level and orchestrated grand event without anyone even knowing he was involved.

It's true just like alfred said. "Some men just want to watch the world burn." Joker wasn't trying to prove anything he just really enjoyed what he did.

I think the reference TGE was making in terms of Bats killing was when he tackled Harv to the dirt and he died.

Originally posted by Man of Christ
The joker about whom i refer is the antagonist from the move :The Dark Knight versus hannibal lecter.

both are clever and have taken many lives in thier respective fields. given thier twisted nature i have 3 levels i want to measure from each of them.


1) who is more morally depraved?

2) who is more clever/ ingenious?

3) who wins in a fight ( weapons tactics and all)?

Joker
Lector in a landslide
Joker

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
absence of proof? I'm not stating anything that isn't reinforced by the material in the movies. Lecter never had the type of ambition that the Joker had so, we cannot say what he could and couldn't accomplish if he were compelled to convey a pointless and redundant message. What we do know about Lecter, however, is that his goals always involve elaborate schemes that are elaborately planned. The same can be said about the Joker but i really have a problem in believing this. In TDK he relied to much on luck.

The difference between the Joker and Lecter is that Lecters goals are always self centered. There is no chaos involved in his goals. They are intricately plotted. The Jokers' goals involved using chaos to spread the message of chaos. As we know, Chaos is unpredictable. This is why the Joker failed.

I'm still yet to be convinced that the Joker accomplished anything other than murder and destruction. He didn't force Batman to kill anyone. He forced Batman to choose who he was going to pursue. Batman can't be in two places at once. Had the Joker not given Batman the wrong address it is very possible that the police would have made it to Dent in time. I really don't know how Batman was forced to kill. He didn't kill anyone.

I don't even see how the Joker proved that anyman can become like him. Isn't it common knowledge that every man has his breaking point? I didn't see anyone in the movie arguing otherwise. Dent snapped, yeah, but he didn't become like the Joker in the least bit. He wasn't going around murdering innocent people and spread senseless chaos. He was merely seeking revenge. The Joker may have helped to cause that by burning his face off and killing his fiance but it could have been anyman who pushed Dent to that breaking point. If all the joker proved is that everyman has their breaking point, well, that's pretty lame. I could have told everyone that The Joker failed, partner. The only thing he ever accomplished was murder and mayhem. Any nut with a gun can do that. Lecter, on the other hand changed lives on a deep profound level and orchestrated grand event without anyone even knowing he was involved. I'm not reading that sir.

Joker's a psycho and Lecter's a ****** up psycho. Not every day a villain wears someone's skin to make an escape out of a prison.

In a fight, Joker wins. You don't know what he'll pull out of his sleeves when you fight him.

Originally posted by ThunderGodEneru
I'm not reading that sir.

I don't blame you. It's probably for the best anyway. I think i was buzzin hard

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh cant beat a good buzz post.

got the ban stick for doing "high posts"

Damnnnnnnn.

No love/respect for a person's highness anymore.

Not even... from the governments uhuh

I know this one's over, but I'm bored. Anyway, eating people isn't unprecedented. Neither in the animal kingdom (eating babies) nor in humanity. People from all over the word, cultures completely separate from one another have eaten people. So that doesn't make him all that depraved (by our standards, yeah, but moral relativism blah blah). Also, Hannibal wants nice, expensive things. He wants to be a respected member of the community. Joker "wants to see the world burn". He doesn't care about money, except as a means to buy more materials to cause more destruction. He only cares about entertaining himself, and corrupting people.
1. Joker, for above reasons.
2. Joker. Hannibal's been stuck in "prison" (although his escape was pretty badass, even though he did it against 1980s security). Joker only goes to prison when he wants to (ok, that's comic Joker. Batman did get him at the end of the movie without him wanting to. Let's just all assume he escaped like a week after). Plus, consider who put each in prison. Lecter was outsmarted by, out-fought by (at least to a draw) and caught by an FBI agent. It took freakin' Batman to catch the Joker. Bat. Man. Lecter's good at planning on a small scale, committing murders and what not. Joker shut down an entire city.
3. Joker wins in a fight. Lecter's best-trained victim was a cop. Joker could have killed Batman at least twice in that movie. Once again. Bat.Man.