Jared Leto IS The Joker - Part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
i agree the photo is a planned hoax. wait for the real look later

What other character in any film, was ever revealed one way as a hoax a day the real look revealed later? I can't think of any.
 
The fact that Snyder tweeted the picture with the comment "Ha ha ha, the joke’s on you Batman…cryptic 75th", would seem to indicate that something is afoot.
 
Home Alone 5. Buy it now!

CDbttShUMAABSPC.jpg
 
The fact that Snyder tweeted the picture with the comment "Ha ha ha, the joke’s on you Batman…cryptic 75th", would seem to indicate that something is afoot.
If he had not included the reference to Batman, I'd be more inclined to agree. With it, it's a bit more direct and less vague in its context. So I'm not so sure it's necessarily a "ha-ha" to us.
 
Yes, it would. If you understand English, you will perceive that those words "joke" and "cryptic" commonly refer to something being other than it may appear. Whether that is in fact the case here is another matter.
 
Surprise. It's actually Andy Serkis

soundstoppic.jpg
 
What gets me is that people are so focused on the tattoos and teeth and not how PERFECT Leto looks as the character. The eyes, the facial structure, especially the jaw, and the wildness. He looks better for the role as it relates to the classic character than even Nicholson or Ledger ever did.

Even if he has tattoos, even if he has one on his forehead, I doubt people are going to be noticing them during the movie/s.
 
Last edited:
Either Snyder doesn't have a clear understanding of what the word "cryptic" means, or there might be more to it.

Well cryptic is a very... um... awesome word.
 
Even if he has tattoos, even if he has one on his forehead, I doubt people are going to be noticing them during the movie/s.
Unless I'm staring at his shoes the entire time, I think it's kinda unavoidable to see his face tats and that ugly grill.
 
Yes, it would. If you understand English, you will perceive that those words "joke" and "cryptic" commonly refer to something being other than it may appear. Whether that is in fact the case here is another matter.

Reason does not work around these parts partner.
 
Unless I'm staring at his shoes the entire time, I think it's kinda unavoidable to see his face tats and that ugly grill.

It's called acting. He's very good at it. It's quite possible.
 
I suppose the forehead tattoo doesn't bother me as much as it does other people, because the first things I'm drawn to when I look at this picture are his eyes and mouth.

If that ends up being the case with actual performance itself, then I doubt I'll notice the tattoo all that much.
 
It's called acting. He's very good at it. It's quite possible.
Of course he could be great in the role, but what does that have to do with "not noticing them during the movie"? This isn't a radio broadcast, I can see him while he's acting.
 
Of course he could be great in the role, but what does that have to do with "not noticing them during the movie"? This isn't a radio broadcast, I can see him while he's acting.

I suppose the forehead tattoo doesn't bother me as much as it does other people, because the first things I'm drawn to when I look at this picture are his eyes and mouth.

If that ends up being the case with actual performance itself, then I doubt I'll notice the tattoo all that much.

Exactly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,435
Messages
22,105,486
Members
45,898
Latest member
NeonWaves64
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"