The Dark Knight Caine Describes Ledger's Joker

Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
2,248
Reaction score
0
Points
56
London, Nov 25 - Sir Michael Caine said the Joker's role played by actor Heath Ledger in the new Batman movie is as good as Jack Nicholson's in the original 'Batman' released in 1989.


Earlier, Nicholson had expressed his displeasure in not being asked to reprise his role as Joker in 'The Dark Knight', however, Caine, who acts as Alfred the butler believes Ledger's portrayal of Joker is nastier, ananova.com reported.


He said: 'The problem was, how do you top Jack Nicholson as the Joker? Heath Ledger plays the Joker and he is fantastic. I couldn't see how Jack could be topped but he's at least equal to him. It's extraordinary. Jack's Joker was a very nasty old uncle, this Joker is a maniacal, murderous psychopath.


'And when you see the make-up - he looks like he's mentally gone. He puts the make-up on to disguise himself and then goes and never takes it off again, or washes, so gradually it looks like leprosy. I'm a great fan of Christopher Nolan. I thought 'Batman Begins' was the best Batman I'd ever seen. And I think this one will be better than that.'


The movie is directed by Christopher Nolan and stars Christian Bale as Batman

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/147580.html
 
He would have to re-apply the make-up often though. Sweat/rain would ruin it.
 
and never takes it off again, or washes, so gradually it looks like leprosy

That would explain why he looks so wrinkled and different in all the different pics !:cwink: :cwink:

I think I'm really starting to get the picture !
 
He would have to re-apply the make-up often though. Sweat/rain would ruin it.

i agree, although i like the idea of it getting sloppy (kinda creepy if its done right) i dont want it to look like that for the whole movie

god Caine is a loud mouth, he just cant shut up about Ledger.
 
I know a load of people will hate this idea, but as long as it doesn't look bad I don't see the problem, in terms of the implications for the character of the Joker.

Joker to me is always better as someone who chose to be a freak, not someone who was forced to be a freak due to external occurrences.
 
Joker to me is always better as someone who chose to be a freak, not someone who was forced to be a freak due to external occurrences.


How could you like that version of the character when it's NEVER, EVER been like that?


Also, this means that there will be some point in the movie where we see Joker WITHOUT his make-up on.
 
How could you like that version of the character when it's NEVER, EVER been like that?


Also, this means that there will be some point in the movie where we see Joker WITHOUT his make-up on.

im a little doubtfull of that (or i REALLY dont want it; w/e) that is the one thing i dont want to see, him with his makeup off. I think Nolan is intelligent enough to know what not to do.

wait nvm, their is that spy pic where he is dressed up like a cop...crap.
 
im a little doubtfull of that (or i REALLY dont want it; w/e) that is the one thing i dont want to see, him with his makeup off. I think Nolan is intelligent enough to know what not to do.

wait nvm, their is that spy pic where he is dressed up like a cop...crap.


And at some point he does get cuaght, and he does go to trial.


I doubt they'd let him keep it on then.
 
Well, I would have done things differently, but I suppose that the more you love the comic books, the more inevitably you will be disappointed.
 
How could you like that version of the character when it's NEVER, EVER been like that?


Also, this means that there will be some point in the movie where we see Joker WITHOUT his make-up on.

So you've seen it then?


I only said what I did in my last post because when I think of the Joker my ideal is someone who has been given no origin and absolutely relishes what he does and the character he is. Make-up may have never been done before but this new angle is in line with everything I like about the character of the Joker - he completely chooses to be what he is.

Now if there are scenes where it looks plain awful then I may not like it but apart from the interrogation scene (which will probably be intense as hell, and the smearing may add to the mood) we've no evidence it will look bad.

But, as always, we'll see.
 
If what Caine said is true (I'm skeptical that he spilled the beans on the Joker's deal just like that), then I still don't give a damn. As long as they present it well and seriously, any interpretation is fine by me.
 
And at some point he does get cuaght, and he does go to trial.


I doubt they'd let him keep it on then.

i guess ill just have to reserve my opinion until after the trailer (and pray it wont be like that) but i dont think i will really mind, because if Ledger is playing him like the people who are doing the marketing are, he will be amazing....which brings up a funny idea, what if the viral marketing is portraying Mr. J completely different than Ledger is? :oldrazz:
 
Ugh, don't like this.

Joker's skin is suppossed to be bleached by a chemical bath, not make up!

Eventually any make up wouyld just wash off, it is not logical.

I don't want a joker that has to reapply make up!!!! arrggghhhhh!!!!!!

This means that joker won't fall into a vat of chemicals, ... that's like Spider-Man not getting bitten by a spider.

This sucks ass
 
And at some point he does get cuaght, and he does go to trial.


I doubt they'd let him keep it on then.


I know he is captured, but I don't think he goes to trial. Dosn't he escape by:
Planting the bomb in his inmate's stomach?
 
So you've seen it then?


I only said what I did in my last post because when I think of the Joker my ideal is someone who has been given no origin and absolutely relishes what he does and the character he is. Make-up may have never been done before but this new angle is in line with everything I like about the character of the Joker - he completely chooses to be what he is.


And that goes against everything the character is.
 
Not exactly, but there is a comparison to be made.
 
For the longest time after his creation there was never any answer as to the Joker's origin. I liked that time.
 
I know he is captured, but I don't think he goes to trial. Dosn't he escape by:
Planting the bomb in his inmate's stomach?


It may have changed, but if that's the case, then it's a wee bit of a cop-out.


If he WAS captured, they'd NEVER let him keep the make-up on. So he'll just go uncaptured so he could keep it on?
 
I know he is captured, but I don't think he goes to trial. Dosn't he escape by:
Planting the bomb in his inmate's stomach?

lol that would be a funny scene..."um, could you just eat this? No, no, just ignore the ticking"

i really dont think there will be a chemical bath, that would be two chemical mishaps in one movie (counting Dent) = boring and repetative

people would start to question the ethical security of toxic chemicals in Gotham.
 
And that goes against everything the character is.

In what way? I really hate the way people claim to know what the Joker is "meant to be". He can be interpreted a million different ways, he is bat**** insane and thats all there is to it.
 
I honestly don't have a problem with it being makeup. You'll have to remember, that they are looking for a more "Realistic" portrayel of the Joker, and dumping him in acid and him surviving isn't. Besides, if you look at what acid burns does to human flesh Joker would end up looking more like Two-Face than the Joker.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,970
Messages
21,868,486
Members
45,674
Latest member
Cosmania
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"