The Dark Knight I guess joker just applies make-up after all

[Sandouras]

Did you imagine Heath doing the same before the trailer? Both him and Depp have naturally deep voices, and the latter can do growly as well (Sweeney Todd).


What a wonderful suggestion.

i meant that i'd rather have a mediocre joker than none at all. I hope joker has a lot of screentime in the third film. Nolan should take his time and think carefully before recasting. He should find someone to finish the job the right way. Nolan will guide him through to make the transition as seamless as possible.

 

[Crook]

i meant that i'd rather have a mediocre joker than none at all.

You're not really making a good case for yourself here.

I hope joker has a lot of screentime in the third film. Nolan should take his time and think carefully before recasting. He should find someone to finish the job the right way. Nolan will guide him through to make the transition as seamless as possible.

I highly doubt Nolan will cast someone else, it's just a gut feeling that Heath is Nolan's Joker, and no one could replace him at this point. I'd rather have no Joker because he wasn't gonna have a bigger role anyway. I loved Nicholson's take, but him being in one film didn't detract from anything.

 

[Eggyman]

I say we still need to see Heath's joker first to decide who can replace him.

I just cant see Depp doing that growling voice that Heath does when he says "come on, hit me". He is much slimmer and much less manly than Heath in appearence. God damn isnt there a lazarus pit to use on heath?

I just hope that we see the joker in the third film. The joker is the greatest villain batman has ever had. You cant suddently erase him when it was planned that he would be in the third film. Give us a joker even if he isnt as good as heath's.

PS: and please dont use the joker as some rumors suggest. Like silence of the lambs and *****. Joker helping batman catch Harv. I mean...seriously!

I've heard Nolan say before that he just concentrates on the present film. I can't see them having a clear idea of what's going to happen in the third, so I don't think that The Joker will be in it.

Anyway, it looks like he's got a good amount of screen time in this film, so I'll be happy with that.

I'm not really against the idea of recasting if need be; I just don't find it likely to happen.

 

[donk70]

I still say that I would have postponed the picture and reshot all of ledgers scenes with another actor

 

[Crook]

I still say that I would have postponed the picture and reshot all of ledgers scenes with another actor

That's not only pointless considering Heath finished all his filming, but that would've been a huge slap in the face to him as an actor, even after his death. Why would you want to completely get rid of what's expected to be a terrific performance?

 

[Symbiotic]

I still say that I would have postponed the picture and reshot all of ledgers scenes with another actor

Yeah. That would've been a way to honor Heath.

 

[Eggyman]

I still say that I would have postponed the picture and reshot all of ledgers scenes with another actor

*Slaps* GET OUT!

 

[donk70]

You gotta think about the movie, not making a bunch of fan boys happy. This is a business, 1st and foremost. Sure it would have cost considerablly alot of cash to reshoot, but it would have been better continuity wise

 

[donk70]

*Slaps* GET OUT!

Grow up

 

[donk70]

Yeah. That would've been a way to honor Heath.

Forget honoring him. This is a business decision

 

[Octoberist]

You gotta think about the movie, not making a bunch of fan boys happy. This is a business, 1st and foremost. Sure it would have cost considerablly alot of cash to reshoot, but it would have been better continuity wise

This is like the weirdest thing I've read in a long time.

 

[Sandouras]

You're not really making a good case for yourself here.


I highly doubt Nolan will cast someone else, it's just a gut feeling that Heath is Nolan's Joker, and no one could replace him at this point. I'd rather have no Joker because he wasn't gonna have a bigger role anyway. I loved Nicholson's take, but him being in one film didn't detract from anything.

Ok, i d rather we didnt start this debate again. It was tiresome enough the first time.
I ll just say what i said then, that you dont know Nolan's feelings. Nolan cast this actor to do a job and if he isnt available anymore, then someone else has to fill in. With all that makeup you can recast a lot more seamlessly than recasting Alfred.

Anyway, if the joker wasnt supposed to have a big role in the third, then fine, but i wouldnt want Nolan to deviate from his plans. He can say what he wants, but he s gotta have a rough plan for B3 in his mind.

 

[Symbiotic]

Forget honoring him. This is a business decision

I think not.

 

[Eggyman]

Grow up

You're such a ray of sunshine I was joking, in my previous post and in this one

Forget honoring him. This is a business decision

And a smart business decision would be to keep the performance that has been highly praised before and after Heath's death.

 

[Crook]

You gotta think about the movie, not making a bunch of fan boys happy.

It has nothing to do with fanboys.

This is a business, 1st and foremost. Sure it would have cost considerablly alot of cash to reshoot, but it would have been better continuity wise

You've just contradicted yourself with those first and last sentences.

When you weigh out how much dough it would cost to reshoot every scene Heath had, with a *possibility* of a small role for the character in the third film, it's obvious just sticking with the gold mine you already have is probably the best decision in the long run, both financially and creatively.

 

[Octoberist]

I still don't understand where Donk is coming from at all. It's not to please fanboys, but Heath's family. Nolan picked Heath, and he's not going to dismantle his laste complete performance ever.

And in terms of BUSINESS, it would create a huge backlash/stir amongst Hollywood. And Heath's family. Christian and Nolan were close to Heath, so obviously I'll p*ss them off, along with the cast.

Continuity? I don't get mad too often, but this is completely absurd unless you're joking around.

 

[Mister J]

Forget honoring him. This is a business decision

How smart of a business decision is it to postpone a movie from the most profitable time of year (missing out on maximizing merchandising and licensing revenues), take on further costs in casting calls and re-shoots all for the purpose of preserving continuity for a character that, as far as we know, never had any inclusion in a potential third film? All this, mind you, while WB was looking to this project as one of its marquee tentpoles for the year.

I know this thread occasionally veers away from the make-up issue to discuss other characteristics and defining traits of the Joker, but seriously, let's drop the re-casting talk.

 

[Octoberist]

yes, let's get back!

 

[Eggyman]

It's make-up!

 

[Octoberist]

I think the most accurate portrayl of the make-up on a piece of merchendise would have to to be the bobble-head Joker. Seriously,I think they did a better job than DC Direct! Blasphemy! The creases and weariness of the make-up is there but still understated.

 

[TheBatman072]

I still say that I would have postponed the picture and reshot all of ledgers scenes with another actor

And you're still very, very wrong.


Quite the coinkydink, eh?

 

[donk70]

It has nothing to do with fanboys.


You've just contradicted yourself with those first and last sentences.

When you weigh out how much dough it would cost to reshoot every scene Heath had, with a *possibility* of a small role for the character in the third film, it's obvious just sticking with the gold mine you already have is probably the best decision in the long run, both financially and creatively.

No I didn't. Think about it: Continuity would be much more rewarding finacially for WB and DC. You start getting new actors to replace the previous ones, it spells doom (re:the previous Batman franchise, Superman Returns).

Continuity=greater cash flow

 

[Octoberist]

Found it!

 

[Octoberist]

No I didn't. Think about it: Continuity would be much more rewarding finacially for WB and DC. You start getting new actors to replace the previous ones, it spells doom (re:the previous Batman franchise, Superman Returns).

Continuity=greater cash flow

Dude, all of you guys, read Mr. J's comment. Let this go please.

 

[Eggyman]

Thanks for hunting that picture out, Octoberist. I've never seen that before