Read more!
I was making dinner on that sad and cold day in January when I received a text from my friend Jen that Heath Ledger had died. After gasping and maddeningly flipping through the channels on TV to confirm the news (thanks, CNN ticker), and holding back a few tears, I pondered what it would be like in six months time, when his final film, the upcoming Batman sequel
The Dark Knight, would be released.
Now the praise and hype regarding Ledger's performance is coming in faster than the Batmobile, here's a take on whether hyping his performance (even before the movie is out) is justified. Check out the analysis, after the jump!
Anti-Hype: Judging by the latest Entertainment Weekly article on The Dark Knight and Ledger himself, everyone involved with the production from Christian Bale to Christopher Nolan, would much prefer to talk about other elements of the film aside from Ledger as the Joker, as it still seems to bring grief and sadness to the cast. Let's keep in mind that, especially for a superhero film, the credentials of the cast and director or incredible, with each actor being worthy of the same amount of attention as Ledger. Furthermore, with the film already garnering fantastic reviews regarding it as a genius work of crime fiction and possibly the greatest superhero movie ever made, there's obviously plenty of hype to spread around the the cast and crew, as well as to the film itself.
Furthermore, while Warner bros. has been classy and cautious in using Ledger in their marketing material for the film, I will say that they certainly aren't stopping the hype either, which is leading the box-office predictors to think that The Dark Knight could attain record-breaking grosses on opening weekend. While attention does deserve to be drawn to Ledger as the Joker, he almost appears more in the trailers than Batman does. Isn't this a Batman movie, not a Joker movie? While Warners is certainly being cautious of how to market Ledger's performance, one has to wonder if the box-office grosses can be considered financial success, or blood money.
Lastly, is it wrong to even consider Ledger for an Oscar nomination based solely upon his death? Let's keep in mind that this is a superhero movie, not exactly the kind that usually warrants a slew of Oscars (although between Dark Knight and Iron Man, this may be the year that all changes). While I'm all for memorializing a gifted performer, at the same time, the Oscars are supposed to be awarded to the best performances of the year. If there's five better supporting performances this year, shouldn't they get what they deserve instead of what may be a sympathy vote and tribute to Ledger?
Pro-Hype: First off, Ledger as the Joker is hardly the first performance that has garnered immense hype even before the film's release. Just last year, Javier Bardem's chilling (and Oscar-baiting) performance in No Country For Old Men was being talked about months before its release. Similarly, Ellen Page's performance in last year's Juno was being hyped as having her as the next big thing, and it also turned out to be true. Very often, performances and films are hyped as having the big Oscar buzz long before anyone has seen them. Sometimes it pans out (No Country for Old Men, There Will be Blood), sometimes it doesn't (hello, Memoirs of a Geisha). THAT IS WHAT THE HYPE MACHINE DOES. Sometimes it's right, sometimes it's wrong. Overall though, Ledger's performance as the Joker shouldn't be knocked just because most people haven't seen it yet.
Yes, this is a superhero movie. The big guy in the batsuit let's us all know that. And yes, these films are generally not the kind that garner awards attention. But there's always an exception. In 1989, Jack Nicholson was nominated for a Golden Globe for playing, that's right, The Joker in Tim Burton's Batman. Sometimes performances in non-traditional Oscar movies are so strong that they break down those barriers and gain nominations. It's happened in the past with horror (Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lambs), sci-fi (Sigourney Weaver in Aliens) and even fantasy (Ian McKellen for The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring). As superhero movies have become a genre in and of itself, maybe it really is time that an actor got nominated for one, and Ledger as the Joker shouldn't be ignored just because he's dead.
As for any complaints of marketing Ledger to bring in a greater audience, let's keep this also in mind: while Batman broods in a cave, the Joker is the real performance for an actor to sink his teeth into, as has been evidenced by the various maniacal and over-the-top performances given by Nicholson, Caesar Romero, and others over the decades. Not only that, but the Joker is Batman's Big Bad Archenemy, and his presence in this new film, especially in a franchise praised for its refreshing take on the superhero genre, is of course going to garner attention. To keep the Joker out of the marketing would do no justice to the film. Overall, people deserve to see the performance and the film. If Ledger's presence is what brings them in, hopefully it will do it so that they discover a strong movie overall as well. Judging from the early reviews, Ledger's performance is just the icing on the cake of a fantastic film.
So overall, is the hype good or bad? Probably a little column A, a little column B. But as someone who hasn't seen the film yet, I'm still seeing it as a Batman movie first, a Heath Ledger movie second. If others go see it with the reverse intentions, that's fine. Overall, Heath Ledger was a fantastic performer long before he ever signed onto this movie, and deserves to have that tribute paid to him any way it can.
Continue reading "The Hype of Heath Ledger as the Joker: Justified?"
