eh, firstly, my point was not that I liked either joker better, my point was they weren't comparable. Neither was trying to play the same character, the original batman had the whole slightly camp, music/singing/colourful cartoony vibe on purpose. This film was different, the dialogue was very different and the idea was different. I think Ledger played it brilliantly, but at the end of the day it was an incredibly one dimensional character. THe best acting roles are normally for people who have to portray a wide range of emotions and idea's within a character. Maybe a Schindlers list where he has to get across sympathy, hardness, emotion hatred, anger and all the rest.
Back story would also have taken nothing away from how psycho he had become, it would just of allowed us to see how he got there, which would have incidentally, if played right, had the character most likely start off a little more sane, be beaten into insanity and thereby showing a wider range of acting which would have made it a more oscar worthy performance.
Again, I'm not saying Nicholson was better, or the character was better. But when you look at the films, Nicholson was asked to play, the normal straight bad guy, then the psycho, the artist, the angry, the happy, the camp, the singing, the flirting, the witty elements. Ledgers Joker was only ever asked to play psycho, he did it very well but he didn't actually have much to do.
His role was writen very very well though, really almost perfect dialogue throughout.
Btw at what point did Scarecrow meet his end as I must have missed that during my quick toilet trip, far too much Coke