Jared Leto IS The Joker - Part 7

[KillerWolf]

It's not about outlandish. You could have Joker wearing a big yellow hat covered with peacock feathers and say that's not too outlandish for him. But it would be distracting and ugly, just like those tattoos are.

Yeah, this. And I also don't like the fact that it ties Joker to particular idioculture, as I always found Joker to be a specific, archetypical character of its own.

I see that some people warmed up to tattoos. Unfortunately, they're still as jarring and annoying as they were the first time to me. Ah, c'est la vie...

 

[Eggyman]

The yellow hat and peacock feathers doesn't sound too bad

 

[The Joker]

Yeah, this. And I also don't like the fact that it ties Joker to particular idioculture, as I always found Joker to be a specific, archetypical character of its own.

I see that some people warmed up to tattoos. Unfortunately, they're still as jarring and annoying as they were the first time to me. Ah, c'est la vie...

Same. I don't think I'll ever warm to them. The more I see them the less I like them.

The yellow hat and peacock feathers doesn't sound too bad

Compared to the tattoos maybe

 

[TheLongestDay]

It's not about outlandish. You could have Joker wearing a big yellow hat covered with peacock feathers and say that's not too outlandish for him. But it would be distracting and ugly, just like those tattoos are.

I didnt think Joker was supposed to look sexy or handsome??????

I think Ive always classed his look as more "unsettling" and "garish".

 

[TeeKay]

I don't get any they gave him tattoa and grills though. Was it because they were trying to make him look cool? He looks like the white version of Lil Wayne.

 

[The Joker]

I didnt think Joker was supposed to look sexy or handsome??????

Who said anything about being sexy and handsome?

I think Ive always classed his look as more "unsettling" and "garish".

Yeah and tattoos are not needed for that. They don't make him look unsettling either. They are just distracting eye sores.

 

[TheLongestDay]

Who said anything about being sexy and handsome?



Yeah and tattoos are not needed for that. They don't make him look unsettling either. They are just distracting eye sores.

I have plenty of tats Ive never heard anyone describe them as distracting..distracting from what exactly??

 

[sdc10]

I have plenty of tats Ive never heard anyone describe them as distracting..distracting from what exactly??

Do you have the word "damaged" scribbled across your forehead?

 

[TheLongestDay]

Do you have the word "damaged" scribbled across your forehead?

I wouldnt say "scribbled".

 

[The Joker]

I have plenty of tats Ive never heard anyone describe them as distracting..distracting from what exactly??

Do you have tats of words like damaged on your face, or tears on your cheek? Do you have your shirt open showing off crazy tats all over your chest?

 

[Juke Box Hero]

To be fair, the tattoos might just be the most "normal" thing about the Joker

 

[TheLongestDay]

Do you have tats of words like damaged on your face, or tears on your cheek? Do you have your shirt open showing off crazy tats all over your chest?

I have a friend who has a teardrop tat on his cheek and a clown on the back of his head, and yes I do have "crazy" tats all over my chest...my point being Ive never heard anyone say they were "distracting".

Some like them, some dont - same with this new Jokers look...same with every other version on the Joker. Some people like certain looks some dont, the main thing for me is characterisation.

 

[regwec]

It's fair to say that the tattoos should only be described as "distracting" if they agitate against the audience's perception of the character as it is supposed to be conveyed. It is quite likely that the tattoos will, in fact, support the creative intentions of director, writer and actor, rather than "distract" from them.

 

[TheLongestDay]

It's fair to say that the tattoos should only be described as "distracting" if they agitate against the audience's perception of the character as it is supposed to be conveyed. It is quite likely that the tattoos will, in fact, support the creative intentions of director, writer and actor, rather than "distract" from them.

Well put.

 

[The Joker]

I don't get any they gave him tattoa and grills though. Was it because they were trying to make him look cool? He looks like the white version of Lil Wayne.

We don't know why. Could be for shallow reasons like that, could be for a specific in story reason. Either way it doesn't change their bad visual look.

I have a friend who has a teardrop tat on his cheek and a clown on the back of his head, and yes I do have "crazy" tats all over my chest...my point being Ive never heard anyone say they were "distracting".

I don't believe everyone whom you've met does not find them distracting in some way. I'm not saying they all do, but I think some do. Probably more than you realize. My personal belief is they are too polite to say so. Not trying to insult you or your friend, but anyone who draws on their face and body with tattoos, especially outlandish ones like a clown on your head, guaranteed people will find them distracting, especially if they're on the face. Just because you haven't had anyone say it to you doesn't mean they are not thinking it.

That's what I think.

Then you have the fact that the Joker is not associated with tattoos. By now audiences have a preconceived notion of what the Joker looks like. They didn't just add one or two little subtle tattoos to him. They added a plethora of big ugly eyesore ones, including one smack bang on his forehead. Naturally so many people are going to find them distracting, not to mention stupid.

Some like them, some dont - same with this new Jokers look...same with every other version on the Joker. Some people like certain looks some dont

Yeah and the reason some don't like them is find them to be an eyesore and distracting, especially the stupid damaged one on his head.

the main thing for me is characterisation.

I'd say that goes for most people, myself included, too. But that doesn't make his visual look unimportant. Because it is. It's very important. No matter what reason the Joker may or may not have for covering himself in those ugly tattoos, it won't make them more visually pleasing.

 

[TheLongestDay]

We don't know why. Could be for shallow reasons like that, could be for a specific in story reason. Either way it doesn't change their bad visual look.



I don't believe everyone whom you've met does not find them distracting in some way. I'm not saying they all do, but I think some do. Probably more than you realize. My personal belief is they are too polite to say so. Not trying to insult you or your friend, but anyone who draws on their face and body with tattoos, especially outlandish ones like a clown on your head, guaranteed people will find them distracting, especially if they're on the face. Just because you haven't had anyone say it to you doesn't mean they are not thinking it.

That's what I think.

Then you have the fact that the Joker is not associated with tattoos. By now audiences have a preconceived notion of what the Joker looks like. They didn't just add one or two little subtle tattoos to him. They added a plethora of big ugly eyesore ones, including one smack bang on his forehead. Naturally so many people are going to find them distracting, not to mention stupid.



Yeah and the reason some don't like them is find them to be an eyesore and distracting, especially the stupid damaged one on his head.



I'd say that goes for most people, myself included, too. But that doesn't make his visual look unimportant. Because it is. It's very important. No matter what reason the Joker may or may not have for covering himself in those ugly tattoos, it won't make them more visually pleasing.

And that seems to be the point you are missing - Joker IS NOT supposed to be visually pleasing - hes dressed like a clown for gods sake lol.

I still dont understand the "distracting" thing..if people have found my body art "distracting" does that mean they would look elsewhere when talking to me or think of something else?

I think you are confusing "distraction" with preference. I personally dont like the "Damaged" tattoo on this Jokers head but Ive still enjoyed every set pic and video of him without thinking "I HATE THAT TATTOO" over and over in my mind the whole time.

 

[The Joker]

And that seems to be the point you are missing - Joker IS NOT supposed to be visually pleasing - hes dressed like a clown for gods sake lol.

No you're missing the point. You keep thinking because people find the tattoos visually ugly that means they want him looking sexy. That's absurd.

It's no different to ugly costumes in comic book movies. People don't complain about them because they want the characters to be looking sexy (unless the costume is supposed to be making the character look sexy). It's because they look bad.

I still dont understand the "distracting" thing..if people have found my body art "distracting" does that mean they would look elsewhere when talking to me or think of something else?

Of course not. That would imply they are too disturbing to look at that so they can't even look at you.

I think you are confusing "distraction" with preference.

No, I'm not. I mean what I say. They're a distraction because when I look at him my attention is immediately drawn to those horrid tattoos, especially the damage one, because they stand out like a sore thumb. For many other people, too.

You think because you or others have somehow managed to overlook them that means they shouldn't be an issue for everyone?

I personally dont like the "Damaged" tattoo on this Jokers head but Ive still enjoyed every set pic and video of him without thinking "I HATE THAT TATTOO" over and over in my mind the whole time.

Good for you.

 

[Manofplastic]

the forehead tattoo is what makes it awkward, yes.
i could live with the tats on joker. i don't really like it, but it doesn bother me much. the illumination-hair isn't bothering me either - it looks too 'hipster done by some fancy barber shop' instead of the results of some chemical issue, but i can live with that.
The damaged tattoo on the forehead however ruins it. It makes no sense and it makes joker mental instead of psychopatic nemesis. hell, it takes the entire nemesis feel away and rather has him like a total *****e.

it's simply the visuals until now, but it's a part of the joker. From the original joker untill the ledger joker, the same basic concept was maintained. Letojoker actually changed the character.

that's where the general reception is negative and why i personally am having a lot of trouble embracing the new joker. Knowing leto's capabilities, he'll probably set a brilliant joker though. That still doesn't take away the character is.....changed.

 

[TheLongestDay]

No you're missing the point. You keep thinking because people find the tattoos visually ugly that means they want him looking sexy. That's absurd.

It's no different to ugly costumes in comic book movies. People don't complain about them because they want the characters to be looking sexy (unless the costume is supposed to be making the character look sexy). It's because they look bad.



Of course not. That would imply they are too disturbing to look at that so they can't even look at you.



No, I'm not. I mean what I say. They're a distraction because when I look at him my attention is immediately drawn to those horrid tattoos, especially the damage one, because they stand out like a sore thumb. For many other people, too.

You think because you or others have somehow managed to overlook them that means they shouldn't be an issue for everyone?



Good for you.

Its obvious you have a hatred of body art, so it just sucks for you they decided on that particular visual element for this version of The joker.

 

[The Joker]

Its obvious you have a hatred of body art, so it just sucks for you they decided on that particular visual element for this version of The joker.

I don't have a hatred for body art. For example Harley Quinn in Arkham City had a couple of little Joker tattoos on her naval. They didn't bother me at all. Had she been plastered with them all over her chest, and on her face etc, then I'd have a problem with them.

I wouldn't want Joker wearing a big yellow hat with peacock feathers on it either, but that doesn't mean I hate hats lol.

 

[TheLongestDay]

I don't have a hatred for body art. For example Harley Quinn in Arkham City had a couple of little Joker tattoos on her naval. They didn't bother me at all. Had she been plastered with them all over her chest, and on her face etc, then I'd have a problem with them.

So its the quantity of body art

 

[The Joker]

So its the quantity of body art

Exactly. They over did it to the point where it's visually hurt the character. And the choice of location for some of them like on his face.

 

[John-An]

A couple of tattoos aren't that outlandish for a character called THE JOKER.

This!

I didnt think Joker was supposed to look sexy or handsome??????

I think Ive always classed his look as more "unsettling" and "garish".

or that his outfit won't be a mockery of the society or make sense

I don't get any they gave him tattoa and grills though. Was it because they were trying to make him look cool? He looks like the white version of Lil Wayne.

Oh I didn't know you already have seen the performance to see if that's the reason.

It's fair to say that the tattoos should only be described as "distracting" if they agitate against the audience's perception of the character as it is supposed to be conveyed. It is quite likely that the tattoos will, in fact, support the creative intentions of director, writer and actor, rather than "distract" from them.

This.

I have a friend who has a teardrop tat on his cheek and a clown on the back of his head, and yes I do have "crazy" tats all over my chest...my point being Ive never heard anyone say they were "distracting".

Some like them, some dont - same with this new Jokers look...same with every other version on the Joker. Some people like certain looks some dont, the main thing for me is characterisation.

And it's no big deal, even in set pics they almost arent noticeable. Really, some people act like it is all across his forehead.

And that seems to be the point you are missing - Joker IS NOT supposed to be visually pleasing - hes dressed like a clown for gods sake lol.

I still dont understand the "distracting" thing..if people have found my body art "distracting" does that mean they would look elsewhere when talking to me or think of something else?

I think you are confusing "distraction" with preference. I personally dont like the "Damaged" tattoo on this Jokers head but Ive still enjoyed every set pic and video of him without thinking "I HATE THAT TATTOO" over and over in my mind the whole time.

Or that some things of his characterization makes sense

Its obvious you have a hatred of body art, so it just sucks for you they decided on that particular visual element for this version of The joker.

I think it's the case from many. (not saying all)

 

[The Sage]

the forehead tattoo is what makes it awkward, yes.
i could live with the tats on joker. i don't really like it, but it doesn bother me much. the illumination-hair isn't bothering me either - it looks too 'hipster done by some fancy barber shop' instead of the results of some chemical issue, but i can live with that.
The damaged tattoo on the forehead however ruins it. It makes no sense and it makes joker mental instead of psychopatic nemesis. hell, it takes the entire nemesis feel away and rather has him like a total *****e.

it's simply the visuals until now, but it's a part of the joker. From the original joker untill the ledger joker, the same basic concept was maintained. Letojoker actually changed the character.

that's where the general reception is negative and why i personally am having a lot of trouble embracing the new joker. Knowing leto's capabilities, he'll probably set a brilliant joker though. That still doesn't take away the character is.....changed.

The damaged tattoo could be there for a variety of reasons. Maybe mocking people who called him damaged. Or maybe since Batman's beaten his face in so many times and knocked out his teeth, so he put damaged on his forehead as a reference to the beatings.

 

[TeeKay]

Oh I didn't know you already have seen the performance to see if that's the reason.

So am I not allowed to dislike something? Leto could very well give a great performance but that doesnt mean I cannot criticize how he looks and quite frankly I'm not too fond of it.