“With a great performance, comes great responsibility.”
The buzz about the supposedly legendary final performance of Heath Ledger began to build from the moment we lost him last winter. Trailers teased us with glimpses of Ledger’s mad visage and creepy, taunting voice. Everyone began to ask each other, “Is this an Oscar-worthy performance? Can it live up to the hype?”
With the release of The Dark Knight last night, many have witnessed this final complete performance for themselves. While most seem to be awe-struck by Ledger’s transformation, a mumbling backlash has emerged on the internet that attempts to diminish it. “We wouldn’t even mention Oscar,” they bravely declare in anonymous chatrooms, “had Heath lived.”
To those out there attempting to denigrate this performance, I emphatically say: YOU ARE DEAD WRONG.
Without a doubt, the death of an actor – particularly a young, talented one like Ledger – often overvalues their last performances and their legacy. For instance, James Dean died at 24 years of age with only three major completed films to his credit. His death sent shock waves through Hollywood, and the resultant outpouring of emotion led to two posthumous Oscar nominations. Looking back, it is easy to see that Dean’s performances did not merit such overwhelming prestige, but rather his untimely death fueled his Oscar hopes. And while Brandon Lee’s sudden death on the set of The Crow in 1994 did not garner any awards for his performance, it certainly helped cement the fallen star as an icon of lost youth for the nineties.
Backlashers are eager to point a cynical finger at Ledger’s death as the primary culprit behind the massive buzz surrounding this final performance. Some reviewers have demonstrated a fetishistic glee in tearing down the performance, labeling it over-the-top. They claim that, had Heath lived, the performance would be seen as a distraction in the film, rather than a centerpiece to a well-crafted whole. They say that, given different circumstances, Heath’s performance would not and should not be considered as Oscar-worthy.
My answer: Anthony Hopkins.
In 1991, Hopkins startled the world with his devastating, mesmerizing embodiment of Hannibal Lecter in Silence of the Lambs. Despite being onscreen for only 16 minutes, Hopkins managed to craft a finely-nuanced and complete performance. It led, of course, to a Best Actor win at the Oscars … again, with only 16 minutes of screentime. Few people would argue that there was a single more important performance in 1991, and it was certainly the best out of the field nominated that year.
Backlashers are correct: it is certainly foolish for people to declare Ledger the default winner of the Best Actor Oscar at this point. However, their unwillingness to budge blinds them from the obvious fact that Ledger probably deserves a NOMINATION at this, the midpoint of the year. While his death makes this last performance poignant, it should in no way color, diminish, or disfigure Ledger’s accomplishment in this film.
What Ledger created is a character so bereft of fear and restraint that he instills both in everyone around him, including the audience. Ledger’s Joker might be the first time this character becomes someone who simply is not afraid of death or consequences. Sure, Jack Nicholson’s fun and campy version danced precariously on the edge of the belltower, but his version has nothing on the sheer violence and contempt for life that Ledger brings to the role. Going far beyond what was written in the script, Ledger fleshed out The Joker with hideous physical mannerisms and quirks that belie the inner turmoil of the character. It is a rich, full-bodied, and tremendously charismatic performance.
To take the cynical, rain-on-your-parade position either out of spite, jealously, or stupidity is to miss one of the great villainous performances in cinematic history. It’s okay, I understand … we often build up our hopes and expectations, only to have them dashed by the harsh reality onscreen. However, I am here to say that sometimes, once in a great while, the right person comes to the right role at the right time and magic happens.
The stars converged here, folks. Stop hating on Heath and marvel at the one last gift he gave movie fans around the world. This one is special, for the ages, and deserving of recognition.
23 Comments
I completely agree. It’s sad that people have set out just to tear him down. I think it’s because it sets them against the crowd, and gives them attention they wouldn’t otherwise get if they agreed with the consensus. Yet I daresay the consensus has it here.
I think the best way to measure the backlash is to go to IMDB and see how many “1″ votes the movie has gotten out of the thousands upon thousands. Those people are who this article is written to.
i loved ledger as the joker. wonderful work. i’ve only read positive reviews of Ledger’s performance online. it’s a shame that some are tearing it down, but everyone has an opinion, right?
besides the imbd boards, which seem to be dominated by 9-year-olds and carlos mencia fans, where else has ledger’s performance been dogged? any bona fide critics not liking it?
Agree with most of that Ray. However, you’re quick to dismiss the value of Dean’s performances. So, in the same way you defend Ledger here in this article, (and rightly so), I’ll say that I completely disagree with you that Dean’s roles were not Oscar worthy.
Ledger as the joker was just amazing! so far i’ve only heard mass praise for Ledger, which he deserves. i’ve only just read about people criticizing heath’s joker but most of what i’ve read just points out if he had not died, he wouldn’t get any oscar nom’s for the joker. I’m just gonna ignore that, cuz this performance is perfect!
what most people don’t realize is that…what we see on the screen of the joker is all heath’s interpretation and idea..the director just went with it. So what we’re seeing is all Heath/all Joker. Nothing can dismiss a performance like that, not even his untimely death. and those assholes who discredit him just wanna cause trouble
ain’t seen it yet, but the hype seems to suggest the perfomance at least rivals last years psycho-killer winner javier bardem…
See, now my desire to see DKR has just fallen by another 5% because someone else has decided to drop to their knees and fellate Ledger’s stone cold cock.
Every time someone bangs on about how revelatory his performance is, it makes me want to scream. I was soooooo psyched about TDK, but since Ledger killed himself, and all the media idiots have harped on and ON about him, a little tumour of dissent has slowly grown.
I’m sure he’s good. Just as he was in Brokeback Mountain. Just not THAT good. This always happens when people die – sportsmen, musicians, actors, authors, whoever… soon enough it’ll all be forgotten, and in five years when we look back, I think a lot of people will be a tad embarrassed by how much hyperbole they have clogged up the internet with.
Is it too much to suggest that people see the movie before they get so agitated?
@ Mary – I’ve seen the film (see my review), and I can tell you that he is just as good as Hopkins in LAMBS … and people still bring up that performance 17 years later. Just go see the damn thing before you start bitching about the opinions of those who have already seen it.
I think Anthony Hopkins is an amazing actor, always. Just as I think Tom Hanks is brilliant. I have not yet seen “The Dark Night” but I have seen the trailer and commercials…he is brilliant. Heath we have seen in many movies, and the dedication he places into his career is such dedication as those actors above. In simple teen hits such as “Ten Things I Hate About You” he played a punk, hard-ass, twisted sentimental due to unlikely love. He caused many to laugh, and also was used as an iconic heart throb. We have seen him in “A Knight’s Tale” as a historical man fighting for love. Romance with no teen heart trobbing intentions, just dedication, brilliance and heart. 2 very different pieces, and both were rather successful. To top these two, we must think of “Broke Back Mountain” this movie revealed a rather sophisticated and brand new mannerisms of this youthful actor, and the movie was immaculate, while the success was even more so. The maturity of Heath had been revealed, even more so he took on a dark man, not even a man, but a creature of a man’s form. He took on the darkness, the sharp whit tongue, the biting, sarcastic nature of the Joker. The captivating lines in the previews of the film prevail Heath Ledger’s wonderful success at becoming an Oscar worthy actor. If this piece does not win an award for the sadly taken Heath, than future performances certainly would have. The voice of Heath in this film reveals not even a bit of Heath’s vocals or accent, reveal that he had completely overtaken this character and more than prevailed. I do know that Oscars are not often granted to the dead, due to the lack of support granted to doing such a thing; however I believe his daughter would be very proud of her father’s success and in the years down the road appreciate her the dedication of an Oscar to her father’s rather amazing, finale performance.
Personally I thought Brokeback was gay ;)
Regardless of how everyone feels about Ledger getting a nomination or not, isn’t it a habit of the Academy to not even look at tentpole films/blockbusters past anything techinal? Like a friend of mine said…
“1. The Academy is notoriously stodgy and rarely recognizes summer blockbusters for anything other than technical categories.
2. The Academy is also notorious for its short memory. It’s no accident that the films most clearly vying for Oscar noms tend to be released in the fall, just a few months before the ceremony. Films from earlier in the year are long forgotten by then, which means they can kiss their Oscar aspirations goodbye.
Ledger’s death, at the very least, will ensure that his name will not be as easily ignored as it might otherwise have been. Without it, he would have no chance with the Academy, whether he deserves it or not.”
Fuck movies — you’re a CUNT Mary. Show some goddamn respect for the dead, you fucking joyless bitch.
Peace.
Wow, it’s not everyday I get to read the words “stone cold cock.”
So here I am Ray. It’s a good post and you make good points, but my belief that Ledger’s performance is not Oscar-worthy has nothing to do with him being dead. And yes I did write a piece wondering that if he were alive would he get all this early praise. He is definitely deserving of the praise because his turn is good. I just don’t think it’s Oscar-worthy. In a comment to someone on my piece I said that it would be near impossible for Ledger to completely show all the aspects of his character within the framework of a blockbuster. He may very well have an Oscar performance in him, but he was not given the luxury of exploring it all. I might argue that if the Joker was in Batman Begins, he would have shown more range for it was a much slower-paced more character focused story.
And as I said in another comment on the post, it’s easier to yell than it is to whisper. From that standpoint, Hopkins absolutely deserved his Oscar. True he did not have a lot of screen time, but he was given the space to let his character play out. There were not exploding cars and guns blazing all around him. It was a movie dedicated to the study of characters. He could have played it bigger but he didn’t. And within that calm and calculated delivery there was range. I understood what made him tick and what buttons need not be pushed.
Anyway, those are my thoughts.
I’ve seen it twice, going a third time tomorrow, and I have yet to see Heath Ledger in this movie. Sure, I see The Joker every time he steps on screen, but I have not seen Ledger anywhere in the movie. When people praise him for “disappearing” into the role, that’s exactly what happened. He became The Joker, and for two and a half hours, Heath Ledger ceased to exist.
There were plenty of scenes in which the nuances of the character came out, thanks in large part to the deftly written script. Not a single moment of his screen time was wasted, and in that sense, Nolan thankfully did not overexploit a good thing–a villain that keeps you on the edge of your edge, frankly because you have no idea what he’s going to do next. That is the brilliance of the movie and of the performance.
Ledger, as an actor, created The Joker and convinced us that this sociopathic terrorist was real. That is what an actor is meant to do: create a character. If at any point you’re watching a film and you only see the actor speaking his lines, then he hasn’t done his job. Ledger did so with amazing ease. Javier Bardem did a similar thing last year with another villainous character in Anton Chirgurh, and rightfully he won the Oscar and every other major award for supporting actor. I can’t remember a more convincing performance since the turn of the new millennium than Ledger’s turn in The Dark Knight. At this point in the year, which actor is more deserving of the Oscar for supporting actor than him? Which supporting roles struck you as more convincing?
This is why, at this point in time (and I hope it remains so), Heath Ledger deserves the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor, and not because of his untimely, tragic, accidental overdose. It’s a true shame, as he was one of this generation’s brilliant young actors.
And lastly, people who have not actually SEEN the movie should not have a say as to whether a movie or performance is good or not. Honestly…that doesn’t make much sense. While it doesn’t always work out this way, award voters are meant to be objective about their decisions. Objectively and subjectively, Ledger was perfect, and the film was a masterpiece of modern cinema.
Haha, edge of your seat, I meant to write.
@ Piper – You’re missing the fallacy in your argument completely: The very fact that Ledger managed to carve out a complete characterization amidst gunfire and explosions speaks volumes about the quality of the performance that can overcome those obstacles. Hopkins had no other competition for screen time except an overrated JODIE FOSTER.
Another example I could bring out is the JOHNNY DEPP nomination for PIRATES. There is no way in hell that his Jack Sparrow character is anything BUT surface and cariacature – lacking substance entirely – but he still received a nom.
You’re wrong here, buddy.
By Depp’s own admission, the Jack Sparrow character is nothing but a Keith Richards impersonation. If that was worthy of an Oscar nom, then Ledger is certainly a lock.
The bottom line is, Ledger was an actor who worked at the top of his craft. No other actor in any picture that has or will be released this year has or will be working at the level that man did. Regardless of whether you feel his performance as the Joker is Oscar worthy, his talent and passion certainly was. He should’ve won for Brokeback Mountain. He didn’t. If Denzel Washington can be awarded for his performance in Training Day, if Martin Scorsese can win for the Departed, then Heath Ledger can and is arguably more deserving for his work in the Dark Knight.
And, yes, it will be because he died. He should and most likely will be honored for the calibre of his body of work and to honor the memory of an incredible performer who undoubtedly had more to give had he not been taken from us.
Everyone else will get their chance. Period.
I loooooove reading that people say that the Oscar buzz surrounding Heath Ledger’s brilliant performance wouldn’t be happening if he hadn’t died.
Too bad the people started talking about the ingenuity and energy of his performance directly from the set here in Chicago last summer. The words “Oscar”, ‘Joker” and “Heath Ledger” were strung together when he was alive and well; that’s yet another reason why he deserves the Oscar.
I also believe Ray is missing something when he says that The Joker would have been better in Batman Begins because it was a slower, more character focused story.
Does he realize that The Dark Knight is a character study??? Despite the explosions and car chases, this is a character driven story, about three men (one entirely evil, one entirely good, and one caught in the middle) who are affected equally by each others’ presences in a world that caters to none of them.
To label this movie as a simple “blockbuster” with nothing but action sequences is dismissive at the very least. The reason why this movie is so good as a cohesive whole is because it transcends those kinds of labels…it’s something more than a blockbuster or a superhero movie. It’s a multi-layered crime drama.
@ Courtney – Courtney, darling … I didn’t say Ledger would have been better in BATMAN BEGINS … Piper who said that. In fact, your entire comment is referring to Piper’s comment, not mine. If you read carefully, you will see that I disagree with my buddy Piper on several points.
Ray, you beat me to the punch. I was coming to your aid.
The movie was great. Ledger did a great job, I just don’t think he did an Oscar worthy job. And bringing up past Oscar mistakes doesn’t somehow legitimize his performance. Depp shouldn’t have been nominated for his Jack Sparrow role.
Courtney,
In my opinion The Dark Knight is a good blockbuster. That’s what it is. This is what a good blockbuster looks like. It’s not Transformers or Independence Day or Hancock. This is what it should be. I think we’ve come to expect less with our movies nowadays so when something good comes by we hold it very very high. Lest we forget Jaws was a summer blockbuster. And it was very good. I doubt there’s one Top 100 list that doesn’t include it. We could only be so lucky to have our summer fare always be this good.
I mean seriously guys. Do you really mark a good performance on whether or not it’s Oscar-worthy? That would suggest winning an Oscar actually means something important.
It doesn’t. Oscars is a sham.
Absolutely Roars. People get so tetchy once the word ‘Oscar’ is tossed into the mix. Oscars mean nothing.
What I will say though is that Ledger’s depiction of The Joker makes for one of the greatest cinematic villains of all time and I totally agree with Ray’s description. It’s a legendary performance and I couldn’t care less whether it gets posthumous acting gongs or not.
2 Trackbacks
[...] Ray wrote a really good article yesterday discussing the backlash (and boy we couldn’t see that coming the moment he died, did we?) that has spread across the web like a sick virus that apparently the only reason we care and rave about Heat Ledger’s stunning performance as The Joker in The Dark Knight is because the actor died in such tragic circumstances six months ago. [...]
[...] OWF critic Ray DeRousse, speaking July 21st 2008… [...]