Fan Theory Suggests The Joker Is Actually The Hero In The Dark Knight

A Reddit user has come up with a fascinating theory that the Joker is the real hero in Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight.

And while it seems insane to think that, he makes a lot of interesting points.

This is what he wrote:

"I briefly checked the history by doing a few searches and didn't see anything quite like this, but I apologize if someone else has come up with a similar theory before.

Joker, although a lying psychopath, is actually the hero in The Dark Knight. Before the Joker, Gotham was a mess. Entire sections of the city were closed off due to madness, organized crime ran rampant, and the majority of important city officials were wildly corrupt. The city even tolerated a renegade vigilante who ran around wearing a rubber suit (Okay, special armor and carbon fiber, but they don't know that).

Along comes the Joker and by the end of a very short time, almost all organized crime was eliminated, many corrupt officials were imprisoned or dead, and the city's Vigilante even went into hiding for 8 years. This was all part of Joker's masterfully executed plan.

Everyone must realize that Joker, despite his claim otherwise, really was "The Man With The Plan" throughout the entire film. The very first thing we see Joker do is rob a mafia controlled bank, eliminating the entire team of expert bank robbers who helped him pull it off. Of course, the robbery wasn't about the money, it was about luring Lau out of hiding, preferably with all the major crime families' collective money.

This works beautifully, and as Joker predicts, Batman goes to Hong Kong to "Extradite" Lau. Now Lau is in a safe place which Joker can, amazingly, access with ease. This of course is all just the plot of the film, but Joker is playing it amazingly, murdering key criminals and corrupt officials that could help insulate those at the top. Dent actually argues FOR insulating the men on the top in the interest of cleaning the streets of lower-level goons, but Joker knows that won't work in the long-term.


At this point we honestly just have 3 men battling for Gotham's "soul" (as Joker puts it), but Dent and Wayne are simply playing into Joker's greater plan. This even extends to Joker's threats to destroy a hospital. With Batman and Gordon's help, Joker helps them root out corrupt police officials. Dent even kills some of those officials later in the film.

Gordon's promotion, too, did a major service to Gotham. I think a lot of people take the Joker's clapping during Gordon's promotion scene to be sarcastic, but I actually think that Joker believed in Gordon, one of the few officers on the force who was truly incorruptible.

So now Joker has a pretty clear path to getting rid of the Organized Crime problem and the corrupt officials problem, but the Vigilante problem remains. As we saw at the beginning of the film, Batman was inspiring other vigilantes, and a society cannot stand when each man takes his own justice. This symbol of fear and unbridled vengeance, as Joker sees it, needs to be stopped, but not Killed. If he were killed, he would just be a martyr, and his symbol would live on. Of course, since Dent was a far better symbol for the city, he would make a far better martyr.

I don't know if Joker actually intended for Harvey to be so physically scarred by the explosion from which Batman saved him, but I am certain that he wanted Harvey to feel the full pain of Rachel's death, which is why he purposely tells Batman to go to the wrong address. He knows what Rachel's death would do to Harvey psychologically, and that Batman would eventually have no choice but to kill Harvey. This breaks Batman psychologically, and also makes him a villain, a true villain, the kind that abandons his own principles. Batman now has no choice but to disappear, leaving his memory to fade into something of urban legend by the time of TDKR.

When we pick up in the next film we see a defeated Bruce Wayne who had retired 8 years prior. The city was safe and peaceful (until Bane shows up), and doesn't need constant vigilante justice to keep it safe. Joker shows Batman the error of his ways, but does so in a totally devastating way.

Even the display with the two boats at the film's climax only served to prove to the people of Gotham that they wouldn't turn on each other. He proved that there was good even in the most supposedly despicable of Gotham's inmates.

In the end Gotham is actually clean. It wasn't because of Harvey, who died too soon to do any good, except as a martyr, and it wasn't because of Batman who was ostracized and treated like the criminal such a vigilante truly is for 8 years. Gotham was safe because the Joker had cleaned up the streets. He eliminated the corrupt police, he destroyed organized crime financially, he uplifted Gotham's spirit, and he even got rid of the flying pest that had been corrupting Gotham ever since he declared himself it's protector."

The author added that "Hero" may have been a poor choice of words and thinks "Savior" might be a better term. But you get the point.


https://www.sunnyskyz.com/blog/3239/Fan-Theory-Suggests-The-Joker-Is-Actually-The-Hero-In-The-Dark-Knight

The hypothesis Kind of reminds me of The Thieves guild  'of Ankh-Morpork.in Terry Pratchett's Disc world  Lord Vetinari realised that what people crave is stability, and that, while it is impossible to stamp out crime altogether, it is possible to regulate it.and, due to their new obligation to prevent unauthorised theft, quickly became the major law-enforcement body of the city,

Korben wrote:The hypothesis Kind of reminds me of The Thieves guild  'of Ankh-Morpork.in Terry Pratchett's Disc world  Lord Vetinari realised that what people crave is stability, and that, while it is impossible to stamp out crime altogether, it is possible to regulate it.and, due to their new obligation to prevent unauthorised theft, quickly became the major law-enforcement body of the city,

Great point

Not read the book myself.

Maybe this person got this idea from reading this

Didgee wrote:

Korben wrote:The hypothesis Kind of reminds me of The Thieves guild  'of Ankh-Morpork.in Terry Pratchett's Disc world  Lord Vetinari realised that what people crave is stability, and that, while it is impossible to stamp out crime altogether, it is possible to regulate it.and, due to their new obligation to prevent unauthorised theft, quickly became the major law-enforcement body of the city,

Great point

Not read the book myself.

Maybe this person got this idea from reading this

Nooo!!! you have to read the whole series Didgee "Disc world" you will pee yourself laughing

best read in order

Read Mort, Guards! Guards!, Reaper Man and Thief of Time. Also saw the TV adaptations on Sky years ago, brilliant.

EXCELLENT books. Pratchett has one of the greatest voices in fantasy. But there are a LOT of books lol

Death is an outstanding character

Didgee wrote:A Reddit user has come up with a fascinating theory that the Joker is the real hero in Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight.

And while it seems insane to think that, he makes a lot of interesting points.

This is what he wrote:

"I briefly checked the history by doing a few searches and didn't see anything quite like this, but I apologize if someone else has come up with a similar theory before.

Joker, although a lying psychopath, is actually the hero in The Dark Knight. Before the Joker, Gotham was a mess. Entire sections of the city were closed off due to madness, organized crime ran rampant, and the majority of important city officials were wildly corrupt. The city even tolerated a renegade vigilante who ran around wearing a rubber suit (Okay, special armor and carbon fiber, but they don't know that).

Along comes the Joker and by the end of a very short time, almost all organized crime was eliminated, many corrupt officials were imprisoned or dead, and the city's Vigilante even went into hiding for 8 years. This was all part of Joker's masterfully executed plan.

Everyone must realize that Joker, despite his claim otherwise, really was "The Man With The Plan" throughout the entire film. The very first thing we see Joker do is rob a mafia controlled bank, eliminating the entire team of expert bank robbers who helped him pull it off. Of course, the robbery wasn't about the money, it was about luring Lau out of hiding, preferably with all the major crime families' collective money.

This works beautifully, and as Joker predicts, Batman goes to Hong Kong to "Extradite" Lau. Now Lau is in a safe place which Joker can, amazingly, access with ease. This of course is all just the plot of the film, but Joker is playing it amazingly, murdering key criminals and corrupt officials that could help insulate those at the top. Dent actually argues FOR insulating the men on the top in the interest of cleaning the streets of lower-level goons, but Joker knows that won't work in the long-term.


At this point we honestly just have 3 men battling for Gotham's "soul" (as Joker puts it), but Dent and Wayne are simply playing into Joker's greater plan. This even extends to Joker's threats to destroy a hospital. With Batman and Gordon's help, Joker helps them root out corrupt police officials. Dent even kills some of those officials later in the film.

Gordon's promotion, too, did a major service to Gotham. I think a lot of people take the Joker's clapping during Gordon's promotion scene to be sarcastic, but I actually think that Joker believed in Gordon, one of the few officers on the force who was truly incorruptible.

So now Joker has a pretty clear path to getting rid of the Organized Crime problem and the corrupt officials problem, but the Vigilante problem remains. As we saw at the beginning of the film, Batman was inspiring other vigilantes, and a society cannot stand when each man takes his own justice. This symbol of fear and unbridled vengeance, as Joker sees it, needs to be stopped, but not Killed. If he were killed, he would just be a martyr, and his symbol would live on. Of course, since Dent was a far better symbol for the city, he would make a far better martyr.

I don't know if Joker actually intended for Harvey to be so physically scarred by the explosion from which Batman saved him, but I am certain that he wanted Harvey to feel the full pain of Rachel's death, which is why he purposely tells Batman to go to the wrong address. He knows what Rachel's death would do to Harvey psychologically, and that Batman would eventually have no choice but to kill Harvey. This breaks Batman psychologically, and also makes him a villain, a true villain, the kind that abandons his own principles. Batman now has no choice but to disappear, leaving his memory to fade into something of urban legend by the time of TDKR.

When we pick up in the next film we see a defeated Bruce Wayne who had retired 8 years prior. The city was safe and peaceful (until Bane shows up), and doesn't need constant vigilante justice to keep it safe. Joker shows Batman the error of his ways, but does so in a totally devastating way.

Even the display with the two boats at the film's climax only served to prove to the people of Gotham that they wouldn't turn on each other. He proved that there was good even in the most supposedly despicable of Gotham's inmates.

In the end Gotham is actually clean. It wasn't because of Harvey, who died too soon to do any good, except as a martyr, and it wasn't because of Batman who was ostracized and treated like the criminal such a vigilante truly is for 8 years. Gotham was safe because the Joker had cleaned up the streets. He eliminated the corrupt police, he destroyed organized crime financially, he uplifted Gotham's spirit, and he even got rid of the flying pest that had been corrupting Gotham ever since he declared himself it's protector."

The author added that "Hero" may have been a poor choice of words and thinks "Savior" might be a better term. But you get the point.


https://www.sunnyskyz.com/blog/3239/Fan-Theory-Suggests-The-Joker-Is-Actually-The-Hero-In-The-Dark-Knight

Interesting take. Though worth mentioning that even if Joker was the city's saviour, it was unintended. His intent was to show how ugly humanity really was.

And the reason for the lack of crime was due to huge amounts of power being given to the police after what happened with Harvey Dent. That in itself raises issues of how much power should have, as well as the justification of giving such power to any organisation (eg. the police).

So Saviour is a contestable world. If stability at whatever cost is the goal though, then yeah, Joker certainly helped achieve that, whether he meant it or not.

Interesting read

Eilzel wrote:Read Mort, Guards! Guards!, Reaper Man and Thief of Time. Also saw the TV adaptations on Sky years ago, brilliant.

EXCELLENT books. Pratchett has one of the greatest voices in fantasy. But there are a LOT of books lol

Death is an outstanding character

I have read them all at least 3 times i am a Huge fan. the Tv adaptations where "ok" they weren't great imo
but films/tv adaptions are never as good as the books ...with the possible exception of Good Omens  that was pretty close to the book and really well cast

There is an Tv adaption of "The watch" running in the US at the moment, it is to use the vernacular Fu**ing Awful and unwatchable if you have read the books

Korben wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Read Mort, Guards! Guards!, Reaper Man and Thief of Time. Also saw the TV adaptations on Sky years ago, brilliant.

EXCELLENT books. Pratchett has one of the greatest voices in fantasy. But there are a LOT of books lol

Death is an outstanding character

I have read them all at least 3 times i am a Huge fan the Tv adaptations where "ok" they weren't great imo
but films/tv adaptions are never as good as the books ...with the possible exception of Good Omens  that was pretty close to the book and really well cast

There is an Tv adaption of "The watch" running in the US at the moment, it is to use the vernacular Fu**ing Awful and unwatchable if you have read the books    

Yeah fully agree in books being better than the film adaptations 99% of the time. Nothing beats a good book!

Eilzel wrote:

Korben wrote:
I have read them all at least 3 times i am a Huge fan the Tv adaptations where "ok" they weren't great imo
but films/tv adaptions are never as good as the books ...with the possible exception of Good Omens  that was pretty close to the book and really well cast

There is an Tv adaption of "The watch" running in the US at the moment, it is to use the vernacular Fu**ing Awful and unwatchable if you have read the books    

Yeah fully agree in books being better than the film adaptations 99% of the time. Nothing beats a good book!

Well Based on both you and Korben saying how good the books are. I really have to give them a try

Not a fan of fiction, but then I did love your first book Eilzel, so I will try to obtain Pratchett books and read them all

As to the take here Eilzel It was intended by the Joker, he however was stopped from fully gaining control when he had succeeded in eradicating all opposition

I mean how bad is it that for corruption and violence to stop requires even worse violence?

Its  Clausewitz "Absolute war" scenario. That the extremities of violence escalate in order to defeat the opposing side. I think the Joker emulates what Clausewitz argued was needed in ordered to win a conflict at any cost

Hence to me the Joker was no saviour. You can cast this to the 1920's and 30's with the escalation of violence used by the far right in Germany. As Hitler was absurdly seen as a saviour to. There is parallels here in the argument that has see authoritarian regimes play off a theme to stop criminality. Simple based on their belief systems that views people criminalised based on their beliefs and not any rational discourse. Hitler and the joker relied on chaos, to then allow them to enact extreme measures playing off fear. Which allowed normally morally minded people to turn a blind eye to the violence used to bring about a supposed view of order into a society.

Fear was used to allow violence to become normalised with a view of believing criminality could be eradicated, The criminality was simple replaced by something far more criminal and perverse. Nazism

The only difference here is that the Joker was taken out once he achieved control. There was no Batman to take out Hitler when he gained control, to thus achieve a time of peace

Hence apply the Joker gaining power based off his actions and not being taken out by Batman and you can imagine what horror lied ahead for the people of Gotham

Hence why I disagree with the argument made in the OP

Didgee wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Korben wrote:
I have read them all at least 3 times i am a Huge fan the Tv adaptations where "ok" they weren't great imo
but films/tv adaptions are never as good as the books ...with the possible exception of Good Omens  that was pretty close to the book and really well cast

There is an Tv adaption of "The watch" running in the US at the moment, it is to use the vernacular Fu**ing Awful and unwatchable if you have read the books    

Yeah fully agree in books being better than the film adaptations 99% of the time. Nothing beats a good book!

Well Based on both you and Korben saying how good the books are. I really have to give them a try

Not a fan of fiction, but then I did love your first book Eilzel, so I will try to obtain Pratchett books and read them all

As to the take here Eilzel It was intended by the Joker, he however was stopped from fully gaining control when he had succeeded in eradicating all opposition

I mean how bad is it that for corruption and violence to stop requires even worse violence?

Its  Clausewitz "Absolute war" scenario. That the extremities of violence escalate in order to defeat the opposing side. I think the Joker emulates what Clausewitz argued was needed in ordered to win a conflict at any cost

Hence to me the Joker was no saviour. You can cast this to the 1920's and 30's with the escalation of violence used by the far right in Germany. As Hitler was absurdly seen as a saviour to. There is parallels here in the argument that has see authoritarian regimes play off a theme to stop criminality. Simple based on their belief systems that views people criminalised based on their beliefs and not any rational discourse. Hitler and the joker relied on chaos, to then allow them to enact extreme measures playing off fear. Which allowed normally morally minded people to turn a blind eye to the violence used to bring about a supposed view of order into a society.

Fear was used to allow violence to become normalised with a view of believing criminality could be eradicated, The criminality was simple replaced by something far more criminal and perverse. Nazism

The only difference here is that the Joker was taken out once he achieved control. There was no Batman to take out Hitler when he gained control, to thus  achieve a time of peace

Hence apply the Joker gaining power based off his actions and not being taken out by Batman and you can imagine what horror lied ahead for the people of Gotham

Hence why I disagree with the argument made in the OP

Yeah I agree, it would be a very twisted view to see Joker as an actual savior, but I can totally see how people could come to that conclusion.