Jared Leto IS The Joker - Part 5

Status
Not open for further replies.
If the tats end up being a ruse, that'll be the best joke on us fanboys ever.
 
Shrug. I don't care about the tattoos, except for the the "Damaged" one, which is the stupidest thing I can imagine.

Rest of the look is fine. The less refined, more visually fractured look reminds me somehow of Morrison's post "Clown at Midnight" take on the character.


Same here. :up:
 
Can we not at least agree that there are far fewer and far less significant changes from source in Leto than Ledger?

A VAST amount of Ledger's Joker was either greatly separated from source or made up completely. And most of us forgave it, because we could see Nolan understood the mythos and liked the character and thus the Joker we know was still in there.

I think people are having a fearful reaction (And fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate...) based on assumptions about the thinking behind this image. The tats, the rings, the "grill" seem to suggest some guys with sketch books trying to turn the Joker into a New Jersey goth or something.

Here's the thing, though: Whether you liked them or not, the costumes in MoS were EXTREMELY well thought out. If you watch the behind the scenes stuff you'll see how much back story went into every minor decision. Snyder has made a point to say that he really really tried to include the briefs but it just didn't work with any of the concept designs that included them.

Snyder might not be directing, but he is supervising the DCCU, and they're going to be at least seeking his input. That means Snyder is going to be asking for reasons behind everything, whether or not those reasons are revealed in the movie (Most of Krypton's engineering and fashion isn't revealed in the movie, but there were volumes of thought and design behind it).

In other words, nothing was just thrown into this Joker because it kinda looked cool or because it made him grittier. There's a purpose, and that purpose is likely rooted in the Joker's story. You may ultimately disagree with how that purpose translates into the movie, but you shouldn't fear that there is no purpose at all.
This post deserves a :bow:
So while I can't say I'm in love with Leto's Joker look just by that one picture alone, this time...I'm going to wait and see his actual performance before I make any assumptions about the character.
Well make some understand this... Good luck.. :p
You can find his hair in the comics in any shade of green you like. The intention here, I feel sure, is to imply that the his hair is "really" dyed, as a way of ornamenting his chemically ravaged skin.
:up:
I think the spy-footage showing him in a suit with his hair slicked right back is conclusive evidence that his haircut will be much as it appears in the "tattoo" photo.



"Disguise" was the wrong term to use, but The Joker is a showman who loves to play dress-up. Probably the most famous instance is the "American tourist" outfit he wore to attack and maim Barbara Gordon, but consider also his recent use of a workman's overalls (Death of the Family); safari suit and Arab robes (Death in the Family); Santa outfits (Long Halloween); the sweater, pipe, and slippers stereotypical to the father in a nuclear family (Return of The Joker, flashback scene with The Joker's death); the bohemian artist's outfit in B89; and the nurse's outfit in TDK.

The "prison" look may be a similar deal.



Snyder's use of the words "cryptic" and "joke", with reference to the image, may lend some weight to your view.
All the bold paragraph man :highfive:

Ben Affleck was recently spotted in Toronto. Maybe we might see Batman knocking out Joker's grill.
Oh yeah!!! :mnm:
 
I read somewhere the Batmobile is in Toronto. Any truth to that?
 
I posted it in here :( :o
Ok, I didn't see that. Great news though.

I liked how Assault on Arkham handled things. Batman distracted on a side-quest only to discover the real plot with a confrontation at the end.

Imagine getting Batman v Joker next year, and not having to wait until the solo film.
 
Shrug. I don't care about the tattoos, except for the the "Damaged" one, which is the stupidest thing I can imagine.

Rest of the look is fine. The less refined, more visually fractured look reminds me somehow of Morrison's post "Clown at Midnight" take on the character.
I'm going to tattoo "I agree" on my forehead.
 
I can't wait to see all of the inspired Leto Joker Halloween costumes this year.
 
It'd be pretty disappointing if Ayer really did all of that comic book research and came away thinking, "You know, The Joker would totally tattoo 'Damaged' on his forehead."
 
Last edited:
Strip away the tats and grillz and this Joker is still plenty different from either of those iterations.
I'd argue from a still alone and removing those elements, it'd remind me of a modern, more psychopathic Nicholson.
 
I don't see that myself. Hell, the lack of eyebrows and a permanent smile is already a striking visual deviation from Nicholson and Ledger.
 
Just passing by, sharing my new signature....

RTFazyG.jpg
 
They won't. What you see is what you're getting in all it's ugly lameness.

Well...

According to our source, the Joker image everybody is talking about isn't a genuine image and doesn't match up with how he looks on set. He's missing scars (which we reported on a while back as mementos from his history with Batman) and the grill/teeth are a kind of WTF addition to the image. Our source elaborates that he's scarred on his back and arms and his skin is definitely whiter than what we see below. The tattoos are brand new if even real, and may have been added to cover up the areas where his scars will be.
Read more at http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/exc...pcoming-film-spoilers-273#iticEa2BKDXCvQSZ.99

And in Leto's latest picture of himself post-workout he is a lot more buff and muscular than he is in that Joker pic. So I'm no longer sure this tattooed Joker is the final look.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"