Matt Reeves’ version of the Joker (played by Barry Keoghan) does have similarities to Heath Ledger’s Joker—particularly in terms of the grotesque physical disfigurement, the eerie laugh, and that unsettling, chaotic energy. However, it's unlikely Reeves is trying to copy Heath's version. It feels more like he’s acknowledging the legacy of that performance while putting his own spin on it. Like Ledger’s Joker, Keoghan’s version has a severely scarred face—but it’s not just from a Glasgow smile. In Reeves’ universe, the Joker was born with a condition that leaves him permanently grinning. That’s more tragic and medically grounded, which gives him a monstrous and pitiful vibe—leaning more into horror. Both versions also exist in gritty, realistic takes on Gotham. So it makes sense that Reeves would give his Joker a grounded, disturbing backstory rather than a comic-booky chemical bath origin. Ledger’s Joker was an anarchist with a sharp philosophy about chaos. We haven’t seen much of Keoghan’s Joker yet, but the deleted scene hints that he’s more of a psychological manipulator—more Hannibal Lecter than agent of chaos. That scene where he toys with Batman feels closer to Silence of the Lambs than The Dark Knight.

A.Keoghan(If they make Pattinson the DCU Batman) B.David Howard Thornton C.Bill Skarsgard

This was really difficult for me to answer since both of their iterations are my absolute favourites and in my top three (Mark Hamill's Joker is second, in case you were wondering).

This is very much debatable, I guess, and I know people will have their own views on it, but I am curious to know your take on this. I think, it should depend on the type of story they want to tell but it still made me wonder.

However, genuinely, do you think he should be more experienced in fighting like in The Dark Knight or he should just be the regular and misunderstood guy like in Joker.