Was it Heath Ledger or was it the director? (The Joker)
 

After the Dark Knight alot of people seem to think that Heath Ledger was the greatest version of the Joker ever and nobody could do what he did again. I personally think he did a good job, but I think what made it soo good was because he was given that freedom to be more sinister and darker because of the direction of the film. Others have played the character and I honestly think that if Jack Nicholson or Mark Hamill (90s batman cartoon) were given that opportunity to play the character like that people would be saying "Heath who?" You can look at Mark's preformance in Batman Beyond's Return of the Joker because it was geared to a more mature audience. He is still comedic and "cartoony" but he shows that darker side of the character. I think he still did a good job but do you think it was more Heath or more the direction of the film that gave the character so much notoriety?

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/PFN_xuwiDW0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

They kinda work hand-in-hand. That's how these things work.

If he didn't die people wouldn't have made a big deal at all.

Heath Ledger died.

So technically, it was the cold pills.

As for his performance, Ledger was quite capable and delivered a strong performance. I have no doubt that it was also the director, but "freedom?"

Come on, Nicholson could have played the part any way he damn pleased.

Mark Hamill is pretty capable, but his delivery sounded pretty forced to me on those laughs. That's not an issue with the darkness of the movie. Ledger sounded like he had a legit fucking screw loose (and apparently, he did...Too soon?).

Is he incomparable? No. But for the time being, his death took an already strong performance and cemented it in the general audience. Gonna be a hard sell.

I think Nicholson basically concluded that he was such a perfect choice for The Joker, that'd he'd basically play an over the top version of himself in makeup.
And that's what he did. Not that there's even anything wrong with that. It worked incredibly well.
But for years Jack Nicholson was the dream casting for The Joker, and Nicholson wanted to play the role just as much, so I don't think him or the creators felt the need to have him transform.

I think he did a great job, but he wouldn't even get nominated for the Oscar if he didn't die.

Films like that don't really get nominated for the main awards.

That's kinda why the Oscars suck for me.

Yeah like Jeri said, Jack Nicholson was playing Jack Nicholson. Which is a great joker because Jack is a nutcase if he wants to be. As far as the creative control went with that character, Tim Burton didn't read comic books so had no idea how Joker was portrayed.

As for Heath he was great, I assume he walked into Nolan's office with the "Well here is what I've got" and the two worked it out. It had to have been a collaboration.

Hamil, on the other hand, has a great Joker voice but he's just a voice.

In Burton's defense, he did read The Killing Joke. Or so he says.

I think he cared way more about The Joker, and was drawn to his side of the story more. That certainly shows in the film.
Not totally a bad thing.

Ledger, he is the one who put the words and motions from the paper into amazing actions on screen.

What do you mean by "films like that"?

Probably "comic book movies."

Pardon me if they do get nominated, I'm not a complete faggot, so the Oscars aren't a big part of my life.

It's both. Nolan wrote the script, and more than likely had a very solid direction of what he wanted the character to be and represent. His job is to inform Heath of what this direction is, and work with Heath and allow him to expand on it.

It'd be different if Ledger were like Kevin Costner, who plays the same guy in virtually every movie. No need to direct him. Just let him be him. Joker's role needed direction. How much freedom he gave Heath is a different story.