Ask most people who their favorite Joker is and there's a good chance they'll answer Heath Ledger. The Dark Knight (2008) was one of the first times a comic book movie was taken seriously as a piece of legitimate cinema, and Ledger's Oscar-winning performance as everyone's favorite killer clown is largely responsible. For over 15 years, Batman fans have considered Ledger the definitive Joker, and honestly, I can understand why.
But when it comes to the definitive live-action portrayal of Gotham's Clown Prince of Crime, I'm afraid there is one actor who has Heath Ledger beat: Jack Nicholson. Younger readers may not be familiar with the octogenarian actor — or even Tim Burton's now 35-year-old Batman (1989) — but trust me when I say that Jack Nicholson's Joker was not only good, it blows Heath Ledger out of the water in more ways than one. For instance...
1. Nicholson's Joker Is A Snappier Dresser Than Ledger's
The Joker isn't exactly a fashion icon — for over 80 years, he's been wearing the same purple suit — but that doesn't mean he can't occasionally take pride in his appearance. Nicholson's Jack Napier still rocks the purple suit, but he switches things up occasionally with a fun hat or a tuxedo. Compare that to Ledger, whose only wardrobe change is a nurse's costume straight from Spirit Halloween and a messy red wig to match.
It might not be fair to judge Ledger's wardrobe, given that his goal was to make the Joker look more disheveled than humanly possible, but the fact remains that Jack Nicholson's Joker exudes a sense of style missing from the younger actor's portrayal.
2. Jack's Dialogue Pack's a Bigger Punch Than Heath's
Look, "Why so serious?" is an iconic movie line, no question. It's also pretty much all Heath Ledger's Joker says as far as quotable lines. Nicholson's Joker, on the other hand, delivered such gems as "Where does he get those wonderful toys?", "This town needs an enema!" and my personal favorite, "You ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?" Don't get me wrong, "Wanna know how I got these scars?" is great and all, but "Never rub another man's rhubarb!" is on a whole other level.
3. Nicholson's Joker Is a More Creative Killer
The Ace of Knaves' particular brand of mayhem always involves copious amounts of unliving, but some Jokers do it better than others. Jack Nicholson's Joker makes murder into an art form by using everything from an electric joy buzzer to a quill pen to take out his enemies. Meanwhile, Heath Ledger's Joker uses boring old standbys like guns and bombs to dispatch his foes. Nicholson uses a gun, too — a two-foot-long revolver he pulls out of his pants. If that's not a Joker move, then I don't know what is.
4. Batman 89's Joker is a Bigger Sicko
Remember when I said Nicholson's Joker turns murder into an artform? It might be more accurate to say he turns art into a form of murder. In the character's own words, "I am the world's first fully functioning homicidal artist," a title the deranged Joker makes good on. In what is easily the most disturbing plot point in Tim Burton's PG-13 Batman, the Joker uses his girlfriend Alicia as a living canvas for his sick "art," scarring her horrifically in the process.
Heath Ledger's Joker isn't exactly a well-adjusted happy-go-lucky guy but he never sinks to the depravity of Nicholson's deranged rogue.
5. Ledger's Joker Never Rises to the Threat Level of His Predecessor
In The Dark Knight, the Joker just wants to watch the world burn...or does he? On closer inspection Ledger's Joker is more about disrupting the status quo by eliminating Gotham's elite — both legal and illegal. Heath's Joker never really seems interested in hurting innocent civilians. Nicholson's Joker on the other hand holds the entire city of Gotham hostage with Smylex, a green gas that not only kills but leaves its victims with a horrifying permanent grin.
At first Jack's Joker puts Smylex in random health and beauty products but when Batman figures out the pattern he switches to gassing the city with giant parade balloons. Compared to that, Heath Ledger's anarchist clown just doesn't seem as threatening.
6. Jack Nicholson Played a More Comic-Accurate Villain
I don't expect any comic book adaptation to copy their source material with 100 percent accuracy; otherwise, what would be the point of adapting anything? That being said, when it comes to the Joker, most post-Burton depictions of the character shy away from giving him a comic-accurate origin. So it's refreshing to go back and watch the first Batman occasionally if only to enjoy a Joker born of industrial chemicals and not just some grease paint and a Glasgow smile.
It may be less "realistic" but a guy dressing up as a clown to fight a guy dressed up as a bat is already absurd, why not go all the way? Nicholson's face being permanently frozen in an exaggerated grin and his skin permanently bleached white isn't just more comic-accurate than Ledger's Joker, but it's creepier too.
Until we get a completely faithful live-action Joker, Nicholson's portrayal remains the closest thing we have to a page-accurate performance.