The Dark Knight 1st or 2nd reveal of the Joker

[Mr. Socko]

Well, they both look awful for different reasons.

The first picture is about as un-Joker as one can get while still having a white face and red lipstick. No panache, no flair, no sense of style. Which would have worked before he repaired his face with surgery and grew into his new persona and the character developed in the film.

The second picture has some Joker elements to it, but all of the stylistic elements that differ from the Joker character in the comics miss the point entirely. If it is indeed makeup and he looks "normal" once the makeup is gone, well that really throws the character out of the window. The theme of the Joker character is that one bad day can change a normal man into the clown-faced nutjob that we all know and love. The dynamic between Batman and The Joker is given further depth because Batman can become Bruce Wayne whenever he wants, while The Joker cannot because of his permanent clown face. The whole point of the escalation scene at the end of Batman Begins is that the new villains roaming Gotham aren't normal criminals in masks. They're a whole different breed that can't have lives outside of crime.

Everything may change with the final film, but going by the picture above, the image captures nothing of what The Joker means. Sure, elements are there and it may make for good filmmaking but it seems that Nolan and collaborators are trying too hard to break the mold that they're forgetting what has made the character an icon and most likely the greatest villain in comic book history. I am reminded of a conversation that I believe is on the Sleepy Hollow DVD. Johnny Depp wanted his Ichabod Crane to have a bunch of prosthetics to emphasize the awkwardness of the character. Tim Burton said no, that those elements would be brought out in the performance. I think it applies to this in that Nolan and company could have gave the world a traditional looking joker, like basically any of the incarnations of the character the world has ever seen. Then instead of being iconoclastic, this Joker could have set itself apart through Heath Ledger's performance. I'm of the thought that wacky makeup and twists involving disguises shouldn't compensate for a great performance. I'm not saying that's the case with this film, but there is an idea that this could be the case.

This is all very long and I'm not sure how coherent it is, but I suppose what my thoughts boil down to are if an actor is as good as people think Ledger is, he should be able to give a good enough performance regardless of the direction the makeup takes. That being said, drastic changes in the aesthetics of a character are a little like ignoring almost 70 years if iconic depictions. It's quite possible that Nolan and Ledger's Joker may be fantastic and break the mold and become the dominant Joker portrayal for years to come. But there is something to be said about classic portrayals. And, long story short, the makeup job looks half-assed.

Well said, I agree.

 

[Maggotx9]

I strongly disagree. While it looks more like the Joker than the 1st picture, it still doesn't scream comic book Joker to me. I tried it out with my sisters. I showed them pictures of comic book incarnations of the Joker and then the second picture and both of them said Heath's version really looked very little like the comic book incarnation.

try with batman 1# and 2#

 

[Da_Joka]

I like the second picture. He just needs his skin bleached and it's perfect.

 

[regwec]

Well, they both look awful for different reasons.

The first picture is about as un-Joker as one can get while still having a white face and red lipstick. No panache, no flair, no sense of style. Which would have worked before he repaired his face with surgery and grew into his new persona and the character developed in the film.

The second picture has some Joker elements to it, but all of the stylistic elements that differ from the Joker character in the comics miss the point entirely. If it is indeed makeup and he looks "normal" once the makeup is gone, well that really throws the character out of the window. The theme of the Joker character is that one bad day can change a normal man into the clown-faced nutjob that we all know and love. The dynamic between Batman and The Joker is given further depth because Batman can become Bruce Wayne whenever he wants, while The Joker cannot because of his permanent clown face. The whole point of the escalation scene at the end of Batman Begins is that the new villains roaming Gotham aren't normal criminals in masks. They're a whole different breed that can't have lives outside of crime.

Everything may change with the final film, but going by the picture above, the image captures nothing of what The Joker means. Sure, elements are there and it may make for good filmmaking but it seems that Nolan and collaborators are trying too hard to break the mold that they're forgetting what has made the character an icon and most likely the greatest villain in comic book history. I am reminded of a conversation that I believe is on the Sleepy Hollow DVD. Johnny Depp wanted his Ichabod Crane to have a bunch of prosthetics to emphasize the awkwardness of the character. Tim Burton said no, that those elements would be brought out in the performance. I think it applies to this in that Nolan and company could have gave the world a traditional looking joker, like basically any of the incarnations of the character the world has ever seen. Then instead of being iconoclastic, this Joker could have set itself apart through Heath Ledger's performance. I'm of the thought that wacky makeup and twists involving disguises shouldn't compensate for a great performance. I'm not saying that's the case with this film, but there is an idea that this could be the case.

This is all very long and I'm not sure how coherent it is, but I suppose what my thoughts boil down to are if an actor is as good as people think Ledger is, he should be able to give a good enough performance regardless of the direction the makeup takes. That being said, drastic changes in the aesthetics of a character are a little like ignoring almost 70 years if iconic depictions. It's quite possible that Nolan and Ledger's Joker may be fantastic and break the mold and become the dominant Joker portrayal for years to come. But there is something to be said about classic portrayals. And, long story short, the makeup job looks half-assed.

That's very well put. My reaction to the first image was of Vesuvian proportions. I suppose that I was gentler on the second because the context was at least correct. In either case, the alterations are unnecessary, even if they might turn out to be compelling.

 

[Maggotx9]

Well, they both look awful for different reasons.

The first picture is about as un-Joker as one can get while still having a white face and red lipstick. No panache, no flair, no sense of style. Which would have worked before he repaired his face with surgery and grew into his new persona and the character developed in the film.

The second picture has some Joker elements to it, but all of the stylistic elements that differ from the Joker character in the comics miss the point entirely. If it is indeed makeup and he looks "normal" once the makeup is gone, well that really throws the character out of the window. The theme of the Joker character is that one bad day can change a normal man into the clown-faced nutjob that we all know and love. The dynamic between Batman and The Joker is given further depth because Batman can become Bruce Wayne whenever he wants, while The Joker cannot because of his permanent clown face. The whole point of the escalation scene at the end of Batman Begins is that the new villains roaming Gotham aren't normal criminals in masks. They're a whole different breed that can't have lives outside of crime.

Everything may change with the final film, but going by the picture above, the image captures nothing of what The Joker means. Sure, elements are there and it may make for good filmmaking but it seems that Nolan and collaborators are trying too hard to break the mold that they're forgetting what has made the character an icon and most likely the greatest villain in comic book history. I am reminded of a conversation that I believe is on the Sleepy Hollow DVD. Johnny Depp wanted his Ichabod Crane to have a bunch of prosthetics to emphasize the awkwardness of the character. Tim Burton said no, that those elements would be brought out in the performance. I think it applies to this in that Nolan and company could have gave the world a traditional looking joker, like basically any of the incarnations of the character the world has ever seen. Then instead of being iconoclastic, this Joker could have set itself apart through Heath Ledger's performance. I'm of the thought that wacky makeup and twists involving disguises shouldn't compensate for a great performance. I'm not saying that's the case with this film, but there is an idea that this could be the case.

This is all very long and I'm not sure how coherent it is, but I suppose what my thoughts boil down to are if an actor is as good as people think Ledger is, he should be able to give a good enough performance regardless of the direction the makeup takes. That being said, drastic changes in the aesthetics of a character are a little like ignoring almost 70 years if iconic depictions. It's quite possible that Nolan and Ledger's Joker may be fantastic and break the mold and become the dominant Joker portrayal for years to come. But there is something to be said about classic portrayals. And, long story short, the makeup job looks half-assed.

my god, finally someone said it, totally agree!!

 

[Penismightier]

Well said, I agree.

Thank you, I anticipate a mass of people disagreeing with me because the new Joker looks badass. I really, really don't want to go off on a rant about Nolan's characterization of The Joker, but I'm a screenwriter and I just got my film degree a few months ago....and everything Nolan and Ledger seem to be doing takes away any depth the character has. I mean, I went to school and was taught how to develop films and the characters contained in films and what they're doing is pretty much the opposite of what makes this character interesting. I better stop now before I go even further in analyzing this.

 

[regwec]

Look at those homoerotic undertones with the lipstick and perfume coupled with the frame photo of Batman lovingly stared at while applying his makeup. I'm convinced Joel Schumacher is behind that site.

The first picture is quite fascinating because it shows The Joker, who is by tradition a sadist, enjoying a masochistic sexual act. I'm not really sure how I feel about that, but it's a striking composition, to say the least.

 

[kenellard]

Not sure if anyone's mentioned this before but joker looks a heck of alot like michael douglas in this photo

 

[Penismightier]

The first picture is quite fascinating because it shows The Joker, who is by tradition a sadist, enjoying a masochistic sexual act. I'm not really sure how I feel about that, but it's a striking composition, to say the least.

My first reaction to the first picture was thinking that a sadistic criminal is bound to be kinky, and of course want to get laid. It is fascinating. If someone were to write a story exploring Joker's sexual side, as in what goes on in his head when he is attracted to someone physically, that would be an incredible revelation of the man's psyche.

 

[Katsuro]

It's an inside joke which started with BB on these boards 2 years ago

--dk7

The Batman Begins boards did NOT invent "teh". That's been around as long as the internet has. Like "pwned" or "lol". And yes, it's just a misspelling of "the".

As for the question at hand, i'd have to say the second picture. I hate the first picture with a passion, whereas the second is almost acceptable.

 

[irishbat]

my own personal opinion if ud care 2 hear it *ahem*

If they're gonna have him paint his damn face instead of a perma-clowned visage I really would have prefered that they'd left him with normal skin tones and dyed green hair coupled with the chelsea grin.....

This make-up crap is exactly that; crap.

 

[CARNAGE-COMETH]

You know what I think it's missing??? What really needs to be seen for me to make a sound opinion on this version of The Joker.

The one thing that neither picture has..... a Smile!

I need to see The Joker with an evil smile and can't wait to hear the laugh.

 

[regwec]

You have already heard him laugh, though we still await his smile.

 

[Mr. Socko]

The Batman Begins boards did NOT invent "teh". That's been around as long as the internet has. Like "pwned" or "lol". And yes, it's just a misspelling of "the".

As for the question at hand, i'd have to say the second picture. I hate the first picture with a passion, whereas the second is almost acceptable.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Figs]

try with batman 1# and 2#

Exactly! Are his sisters like the general audience, to when they think of Joker they think of BTAS or Nicholson.

 

[CARNAGE-COMETH]

You have already heard him laugh, though we still await his smile.

Whoa... I haven't been on the boards for a while is there an actual sound bite of Heath laughing as the Joker?

please say yes!

It sucks but I can't seem to hear the teaser trailer very well at all. I think its a buffer problem or something but the whole trailer skips and is in and out dialogue. It's killing me that I can't see or hear it.

If that's where the Joker laugh is in do you know if theres a downloadable version of it?

I wonder if the Bat Site is giving others probs too.

 

[Maggotx9]

actually there is a sticky thread about the teaser..you can download it thereXD, and FigmanJ .........good pointXD

 

[SpinyNorman]

My favorite Joker pics so far remain the spy shots. Blurry, maybe, but they have a lot more attitude to them than these two.

I've already voiced my worries about the makeup in the second one, and was reasonably reassured by a few things Anjoy and Miranda Fox had brought up from tipsters. What I don't like now is just the pose Ledger's in. It's just... awkward. Like someone paused the movie at a random moment and just caught him in his state. I wouldn't have released it, myself.

 

[Darknightnomis]

My favorite Joker pics so far remain the spy shots. Blurry, maybe, but they have a lot more attitude to them than these two.

I agree Spinny Norman (greatest username ever)

This looks more like the Joker than any of the "offical" pics.

 

[griffolyon12]

The 2nd was just way cooler.

 

[Yurka]

I agree Spinny Norman (greatest username ever)

This looks more like the Joker than any of the "offcial" pics.

Totally agree

I feel that this pic should be in the Iconic images of joker thread.

 

[hegele]

know what? If Frank Miller listened to everybody who loved the Joker of the 50's and 60's, he would have never evolved the character in TDKR.

If these characters do not evolve they will get boring. Let change happen, its not like the joker who all love will fade away when Nolan puts out his vision. If you think it will, then you are admitting that Heath's Joker will have a positive and strong enough impact on the audience to warrant it.

 

[Mr. Socko]

I agree Spinny Norman (greatest username ever)

This looks more like the Joker than any of the "offical" pics.

Makeup on the hands?

 

[regwec]

know what? If Frank Miller listened to everybody who loved the Joker of the 50's and 60's, he would have never evolved the character in TDKR.

If these characters do not evolve they will get boring. Let change happen, its not like the joker who all love will fade away when Nolan puts out his vision. If you think it will, then you are admitting that Heath's Joker will have a positive and strong enough impact on the audience to warrant it.

Frank Miller did practically nothing with The Joker. Tim Burton has had a bigger impact on the character than Miller.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Frank Miller did practically nothing with The Joker. Tim Burton has had a bigger impact on the character than Miller.

Miller gave him a pimpin' white suit....lol