Take it as you want.
http://comicbook.com/2015/04/28/jared-letos-joker-reportedly-has-different-look-than-shown-in-ph/
I personally think they are right and he has scars, but I also think this look is his prison characterization that he made and will take on some part of the movie. But I could be wrong tho.

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.
Perfect summation.Assume the worst, hope for the best, and keep it all in perspective.![]()
Assume the worst, hope for the best, and keep it all in perspective.![]()
This post deserves aCan 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.

Well make some understand this... Good luck..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.

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.
All the bold paragraph manI 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.

Oh yeah!!!Ben Affleck was recently spotted in Toronto. Maybe we might see Batman knocking out Joker's grill.

This!!!! If it's real tho.The Damaged tattoo could just be a red herring meaning. Actually alluding to the scars and not his mind.
I posted it in hereI read somewhere the Batmobile is in Toronto. Any truth to that?

Ok, I didn't see that. Great news though.I posted it in here![]()
![]()
I'm going to tattoo "I agree" on my forehead.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.

He mentioned his favorite DC villains are "Black Manta, obviously" and the Joker. He said he thought the just released image of Jared Leto as the Joker in "Suicide Squad" was great, and that he's "glad it's going a completely different way [than Jack Nicholson or Heath Ledger]."
If the tats end up being a ruse, that'll be the best joke on us fanboys ever.
Strip away the tats and grillz and this Joker is still plenty different from either of those iterations.Jason Momoa on Jared Leto's Joker.
I'd argue from a still alone and removing those elements, it'd remind me of a modern, more psychopathic Nicholson.Strip away the tats and grillz and this Joker is still plenty different from either of those iterations.
They won't. What you see is what you're getting in all it's ugly lameness.
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