He was described as a force of nature. A psychopathic clown. The anarchist arch-fiend to Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight. The man who didn’t care about the money — he just wanted to watch the world burn.
The Joker.
And his performance has clearly struck a chord with the Golden Globes, who apparently have asked themselves: “Why so serious?”
Let’s make no bones about it: comic book movies have finally hit the big time, as The Hollywood Reporter announced today that Heath Ledger’s posthumous performance as the Joker has earned a Golden Globe nomination for Best Supporting Actor.
Ledger died in January following an accidental overdose of prescription pills. According to the Empire, Ledger had isolated himself in a hotel room for a month to emulate the Joker’s mindset and perfect his mannerisms.
Other candidates for Best Supporting Actor include Robert Downey Jr. and Tom Cruise for Tropic Thunder, Ralph Fiennes for The Dutchess, and Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Doubt. Golden Globe nominees are voted upon by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association.
[Via Hollywood Reporter.]
December 11th, 2008 at 11:00 am
wouldn’t he have more struck a chord with the Hollywood Foreign Press than the Golden Globe?
December 11th, 2008 at 11:35 am
Yes, comic book movies “finally hit the big time” now, never mind the Oscar nominations for A History of Violence, American Splendor and Road to Perdition, those don’t count because they weren’t about our precious spandex and leather pervert suits.
December 11th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Dave, I think that David’s point here is that an actor was finally nominated for playing a mainstream comic book character. That’s a hill that the genre had not yet managed to climb.
And if you want to make a point, do it without dropping in the now-tired “spandex and leather pervert suits.” It’s occasionally funny when Warren Ellis says it, but that’s Warren Ellis. Other hands wield that phrase like an insult on people who enjoy super-hero comics. All readers should feel welcome here.
December 11th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Spandex and leather pervert suits? Let’s make a check mark in the ‘self-loathing’ box. Yeesh.
December 11th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Sorry, I shouldn’t have said that, it was rude, but come on, if someone looks down on this stuff why are they posting here? What’s the point? I have to assume that people get into comics because of superheroes, at least early on. What causes such disdain? I ask that about not only the readers but the writers too. What’s the point?
December 11th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Well, if we’re limiting “comic book movies” to superhero movies, then there’s a reason that they haven’t “hit the big time” in terms of awards recognition, and that’s that up to this point, none of them have really been awards-worthy in any aspect other than special effects. I mean, Hugh Jackman, Brian Cox and Ian McKellan were great in X2, but I’m not about to argue that either of those were particularly complex or Oscar-worthy performances.
I recognize that I’m posting this on a site that is unbelievably predisposed towards superhero content and I’m a fan of the genre myself, but it seems like between this and the “why won’t those pretentious art snobs put Green Lantern in the top 10 graphic novels?” post, there seems to be a developing trend on blog@ of propping up superhero content while denigrating anything else as not “true comics,” whether consciously or not.
To act like a superhero movie getting a golden globe nomination is some long overdue validation of the artform just strikes me as being on par with the “BANG! POW! Comics aren’t for kids anymore!” articles.
December 11th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
“a developing trend on blog@ of propping up superhero content while denigrating anything else as not “true comics,” whether consciously or not.”
whu? that’s a funhouse mirror way of saying it, especially when you and others are coming in waving the one flag of “true comics” and denigrating superhero content as trash, while insulting those who like it, either directly or indirectly. Having lived on the internet for a while, I completely understand the defensive and insulting nature that a lot of people end to have, but to date, the bloggers haven’t really done any of this denigrating that you’re talking about. That’s on the other side, coming in from the outside. I mean, who brought “pervert suits” to the table?
December 11th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Dave, first off, Lucas didn’t mention Green Lantern in that post; he had a broader point to make (and it’s one I won’t belabor here).
In terms of super-hero-based films, there’s a strong argument that Jack Nicholson was indeed snubbed for his own turn as The Joker. In the supporting field for 1989, Denzel was a lock for “Glory”, but to say that Dan Akroyd in “Driving Miss Daisy” came in over one of the most popular and talked about performances that year? Not to mention that Nicholson is basically nominated for every other film he seems to make? There’s an argument there.
And before anyone accuses me of saying that “Daredevil” or “X3″ or “Superman Returns” were Oscar-worthy, I’m not. I’m saying that there’s possibly room for discussion. HAVE their been award-worthy turns in other comic films? Let’s talk about THAT.
December 11th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Dave, I feel like I’m going to start making a living of re-posting these same two sentences, but as you decided to bring up my column, I thought I’d give reference for those who may not have read it. These are direct quotes from the article Dave brings up:
“I am very glad that comics and graphic novels can be used and do get used for so many different kinds of stories.”
“I love the idea of celebrating the diversity that has been brought to comics, with much of that diversity coming in the last few years thanks to publishers like Top Shelf, Oni, AiT, and many others.”
At no point did I say anything about those books that I celebrated and am glad for being “not “true comics”,” and in fact only denigrated the types of articles you mention in that final paragraph, indicating that you did read it, but may have just missed those two quoted sections.
edit: Yikes, didn’t mean to look like I was ganging up on you, Dave. Just felt like my post was being garishly misquoted and misrepresented, and wanted to make sure that if this was any reader’s first exposure to it, they got the whole story.
December 11th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Dave, you make totally valid points there, I’m sorry if I was rude
December 11th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
While the discussion here is interesting, to me the most newsowrthy part of this article is that TDK, the biggest movie of the year (duh), the most talked about movie of the year and (aguably) the best-reviewed live action movie of the year (94% at Rotten Tomatoes, has made many a critic’s best of the year including Ebert’s) got completely snubbed for Best Picture and Chris Nolan got snubbed for best director.
I know it’s fashionable for some to bash TDK right now (Steve Fritz, I’m looking at you), but the snubs are actually pretty shocking.
Anyhow, TDK’s success and the GG nomintation for Ledger (with an Oscar nod likely to follow) does make a statement for the “comic book movie.” Costumed heroes are what people tend to think of most when it comes to comic books, and TDK (& Batman Begins) proved that the genre can be just as intelligent, adult, and artistic as any other.