The Dark Knight The Man Who Laughs: The Joker Thread 2.0

[Superhobo]

Truthfully it never bothered me, because the acting was always more important than the bleaching. Would I have liked to see him permanently white? Sure, it wouldn't have detracted from the character in any way whatsoever.
But, when you introduce the bleaching you get the baggage. In this case The Red Hood. Give me some ambiguity about how he got like that and I'll feel more favourably about it.
But as long as you have this evil force of nature starting off as a guy in a penis hat I will always be in favour of the make-up look.
In fact, unless they were to remove the Red Hood nonsense entirely I would be in favour of introducing the Hoboker into the comic continuity.
I mean, Nolan got it. He realy got it. A guy as dangerous as The Joker is infinitely more powerful with no origin. He came from nothing and you've got nothing to scare him with because he has seperated himself from all humanity. It works on so many levels.
But I'm still not sure that we ever saw The Joker out of his make-up. Did you see his face during the cop scene? It looked unnatural. Like a mask.
And did they alter his voice digitally? When he was screaming at the Fake Batman his voice barely sounded human. Superb acting or technical trickery?

I'll tend to disagree with this - while they also could've simply had the Joker appear out of nowhere with bleached skin (and thus further elaborating on their portrayal of the Joker as this force of nature), the Red Hood origin, as written by Moore and Brubaker, has some depth that has yet to be mined. While I'm perfectly, perfectly content with what was presented, there's an odd subtext in that the one who would become Batman's antithesis started out similarly in a mask and cape, among other things. And, even if you're not happy with it, there've been several attempts at a backstory that have excised that element - "Lovers and Madmen" which, while I didn't enjoy it too much myself, did present a couple of intriguing ideas.

But, the approach they went with in the film worked perfectly - I have no complaints, but I still have my thoughts on how bleached skin could've been portrayed. But really, there have been so many variables with his look throughout his history - he's been presented as both using lipstick and having dyed red lips, as having dyed his hair manually and having it dyed along with his skin - that it all works, as long as it's presented well within the context of their individual portrayals.

 

[ronny]

It's just that when you see how well the multiple origin theory works it seems a shame to have some unalterable facts about it all. With the Joker we got in the movie I felt that nothing was certain, that whilst this guy truly believed in what he was saying all of it was utter rubbish.
Yet the chemical bath story diminishes that great idea. Sure, you can debate over who he was before he took the dive but the dive itself remains there. And for someone who sees the chemical bath as fundementally stupid it causes a few problems.

 

[Superhobo]

It's just that when you see how well the multiple origin theory works it seems a shame to have some unalterable facts about it all. With the Joker we got in the movie I felt that nothing was certain, that whilst this guy truly believed in what he was saying all of it was utter rubbish.
Yet the chemical bath story diminishes that great idea. Sure, you can debate over who he was before he took the dive but the dive itself remains there. And for someone who sees the chemical bath as fundementally stupid it causes a few problems.

I guess it would, though I don't really see anything stupid in the concept itself.

 

[ronny]

I just can't imagine The Joker ever being The Red Hood. It's an alias so stupid it doesn't fit his character. He has a mind so warped and brilliant that to put its creation down to a chemical accident seems cheap to me.
This is the guy who pushes Batman to the absolute limit, he's feared by most of the other villains. To have that force of will brought about by a dead wife and a botched robbery is absurd in my eyes.
Plus, the idea of Batman "creating" this guy is a real flaw. As, in my mind, Batman and The Joker do not need each other. Because whilst Batman could continue his mission without this guy The Joker bases himself entirely on his opposistion to Batman.
Batman can survive without The Joker, The Joker cannot survive without Batman. That's the way I see it.
And to have Batman involved in his origin takes away from the monstorous nature of the character. Because it gives him a reason, a motive, it even spreads the blame for what he does.
I don't buy it personally.

 

[SPIDERMAN117]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eiMS7ZiVHU

Wow.

 

[Superhobo]

I just can't imagine The Joker ever being The Red Hood. It's an alias so stupid it doesn't fit his character. He has a mind so warped and brilliant that to put its creation down to a chemical accident seems cheap to me.

I don't see how, really - depending on which version of the story you're reading.

This is the guy who pushes Batman to the absolute limit, he's feared by most of the other villains. To have that force of will brought about by a dead wife and a botched robbery is absurd in my eyes.

Again, depending on which version of the story you're reading - personally, I like Moore's backstory for the character; it works on a couple of levels, but it isn't the only one out there. There's "Case Study," by Paul Dini, which sounds like something you'd enjoy far more, as well as "Lovers and Madmen."

Plus, the idea of Batman "creating" this guy is a real flaw. As, in my mind, Batman and The Joker do not need each other. Because whilst Batman could continue his mission without this guy The Joker bases himself entirely on his opposistion to Batman.

Huh? The concept of Batman 'creating' the Joker is stupid because Batman shouldn't need the Joker?

Batman can survive without The Joker, The Joker cannot survive without Batman. That's the way I see it.

Okay, now how does the chemical bleaching take away from this? How is it a detractor instead of an opposite?

And to have Batman involved in his origin takes away from the monstorous nature of the character.

How?

Because it gives him a reason, a motive,

Since when? Usually, he's only really made use of his backstory as a continual smoke screen, par for "The Man Who Laughs," where it does seem - at first - to be his motivation.

Well, and "Hush Returns," but we don't speak of it.

it even spreads the blame for what he does.

Yes, and that's another interesting layer in their relationship, as characters - why you have a problem with this, I can't fathom.

I don't buy it personally.

The Joker having some depth is not a bad thing. It's not required, but it certainly isn't a bad thing. Personally, I'd think Regwec or Saint should be the one having this dialogue in my place - especially now, where all my posts sound like streams-of-consciousness because I've been up for almost three days straight, without sleep.

 

[Dark Globe]

The whole chemical bleach thing is childish and takes away the mystery of The Joker.

 

[Superhobo]

The whole chemical bleach thing is childish and takes away the mystery of The Joker.

Redundant post is redundant in the context of the current conversation.

 

[Sarg92]

I was searching around on YouTube and found this guy's YouTube channel. He only has ten videos and they are all Heath Ledger's Joker impersonations. The guy says that he isn't trying to be Ledger or replace in him, or anything like that, he just wants to honor him.

Some of the impersonations are really good like Impersonation Number 10 and his Joker Laugh/Cackle. Some are not so good and some are not bad.

You should all check them out...

http://www.youtube.com/user/brosander

 

[Dark Globe]

Redundant post is redundant in the context of the current conversation.

Think about it, Who are you more afraid of? Someone you don't know who just looks ****ed up and capable of doing anything or someone who fell into some acid, got all mad and went insane?

Really, the whole idea TO ME is stupid and ridiculous. I can just imagine 2 kids creating the idea at a table and thinking it's "Brilliant".

Also, I wasn't talking to just you guys, I was talking to EVERYONE reading the thread.

 

[Superhobo]

Think about it, Who are you more afraid of? Someone you don't know who just looks ****ed up and capable of doing anything or someone who fell into some acid, got all mad and went insane?

How would I know he had fell into acid? Do he and I have some sort of prior relationship?

Really, the whole idea TO ME is stupid and ridiculous. I can just imagine 2 kids creating the idea at a table and thinking it's "Brilliant".

Really?

Also, I wasn't talking to just you guys, I was talking to EVERYONE reading the thread.

Yah-huh. It's still redundant, because we're discussing the same thing not even one post above you.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

look the idea that he fell into acid and made him insane isn't the full story, it was just one of many reasons he went over the edge. in the killing joke his wife and unborn baby died, he was a failed comedian who was laughed off stage and then the plunge into the chemical was just a catalyst. the whole point of that story is that anyone can have a "bad day" and snap from the pressure, which i think is a fair evaluation of the human phyche. but to be honest i find that a man who has obviously been disfigured who then puts make up on to HIGHLIGHT his horrific appearance a much more unsettling proposition, the fact that it was his CHOICE to do that is very disturbing. its like he has been ridiculed all his life for being a "freak" and hes thought to himself "you think im a freak? I'LL SHOW YOU A ****ING FREAK!!!!"

 

[DACrowe]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eiMS7ZiVHU

Wow.

Funny but overdone. The best part was the one with the choosing of pets and the end where Batman and Joker agree to meet and battle at another studio.

 

[Überlibran]

Ledger shouldn't get an Oscar for this.

He should have got an Oscar for Brokeback Mountain.

That's the way the Academy works. Most of the time they give award to the nominee for a performance at a later date, when they really should have given it to them for a previous performance. See: Crowe, Russell and Washington, Denzel as examples.

 

[titan101]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eiMS7ZiVHU

Wow.

 

[Dr. Crane]

i thought one of jokers "ya wanna know how i got these scars?" stories could have paid a tribute to the red hood thing... i mean that story line has been around since 1953..

and i do like moore's take on it from the 80's.... but he even said.. the back story pre-red hood part of the killing joke was from the jokers mind.. and you trust it for accuracy? he then went on to say that he even pointed out within the context of his own story that the jokers memory changes with time... the " multiple choice bit"...

the joker existed for 13 years without an origin in the comics.. and that is what Nolan was drawing from... and for 13 years... no one new if it was make-up or not... or where he came from...

 

[Swordmaster]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eiMS7ZiVHU

Wow.

Ah yes, That Guy with the Glasses. A very amusing man.

Funny video.

 

[ospumas1]

Am I the only one who was incredibly creeped out by the Joker Thug who Harvey almost killed. His chuckle and smirk gave me the creeps.

 

[Bat-Mite]

Think about it, Who are you more afraid of? Someone you don't know who just looks ****ed up and capable of doing anything or someone who fell into some acid, got all mad and went insane?

Really, the whole idea TO ME is stupid and ridiculous. I can just imagine 2 kids creating the idea at a table and thinking it's "Brilliant".

Also, I wasn't talking to just you guys, I was talking to EVERYONE reading the thread.

Why can't he looked "****ed up and capable of doing anything" after falling into some chemicals? And you wouldn't even know he fell into some chemicals if you just saw the permawhite Joker on the street. You would just know there was something very wrong with his skin. You're only showing yourself to be narrow minded and lacking in vision when you suggest a permawhite Joker is silly. Imagine a Joker with corpse-like skin, for example, instead of someone just covered in greasepaint like many of the live action interpretations have been.

I like both the traditional comic book interpretation and Nolan's interpretation, and I don't see any reason as to why both can't be seen as threatening. In the comic books, you'd be hard pressed to find someone in Gotham (other than Batman himself and maybe Gordon) who's not terrified of the Joker. And there are very good reasons for that.

It's funny how people are coming out of the woodworks to bash the chemical bath interpretation now. Does anybody know if there was anyone bashing the chemical bath origin prior to 2006? I wasn't posting here, then, but I did lurk and read the posts and I don't remember anything like that happening.

 

[Nepenthes]

Truthfully it never bothered me, because the acting was always more important than the bleaching. Would I have liked to see him permanently white? Sure, it wouldn't have detracted from the character in any way whatsoever.
But, when you introduce the bleaching you get the baggage. In this case The Red Hood. Give me some ambiguity about how he got like that and I'll feel more favourably about it.
But as long as you have this evil force of nature starting off as a guy in a penis hat I will always be in favour of the make-up look.
In fact, unless they were to remove the Red Hood nonsense entirely I would be in favour of introducing the Hoboker into the comic continuity.
I mean, Nolan got it. He realy got it. A guy as dangerous as The Joker is infinitely more powerful with no origin. He came from nothing and you've got nothing to scare him with because he has seperated himself from all humanity. It works on so many levels.
But I'm still not sure that we ever saw The Joker out of his make-up. Did you see his face during the cop scene? It looked unnatural. Like a mask.
And did they alter his voice digitally? When he was screaming at the Fake Batman his voice barely sounded human. Superb acting or technical trickery?

well said. I have to agree, in this case.

and it's also a matter of that , in this particular incarnation, the make-up adds so much to the Joker that Nolan and co have created. And lots of normal people have responded to it quite well.

 

[Doc Samson]

My whole problem with the Bleached skin, like others have said, is the fact that (at least in Nolan's world) that obviously wouldn't happen if you fell into chemicals. It would need a real explanation of some sort (not one of Joker's made up stories) because even in "hyper reality" or whatever phrase Nolan coined for his interpretation, your not going to get permanent green hair and white skin like that. But for me, it goes deeper....

IMO, the comic Joker always seemed a bit supernatural. Aside from the whole chemical clown transformation, he's been caught in numerous explosions and falls that should've killed him plenty of times. To me, this new version is much more closer to Batman's opposite, because he's only a man as well, who wears a mask the same way Bruce does. He doesn't need any kind of chemical accident to make him crazy, after seeing the movie I suspect he isn't really crazy at all, he's just a criminal mastermind with zero motive or reason to his actions, a colorful terrorist, something that strikes without warning. No matter how evil the comic Joker is, he was normal at some point. "One bad day" made him, so in a sense, there's a level of sympathy there...somewhere. On the other hand, this new Joker doesn't have that underlying reason or tragedy, people have scars on their face all over the world and they aren't killers. All the scars did was give him his identity, just like the bats did for Bruce, the man he was before the scars could've been just as wild, except he had noone to match wits against. The great part is we'll never know for sure, and that's how it should be....

 

[The Caped Knight]

I like this poster

 

[The Caped Knight]

Mark Hamill as The Clown Prince Of Crime .

 

[Superhobo]

My whole problem with the Bleached skin, like others have said, is the fact that (at least in Nolan's world) that obviously wouldn't happen if you fell into chemicals. It would need a real explanation of some sort (not one of Joker's made up stories) because even in "hyper reality" or whatever phrase Nolan coined for his interpretation, your not going to get permanent green hair and white skin like that. But for me, it goes deeper....

IMO, the comic Joker always seemed a bit supernatural. Aside from the whole chemical clown transformation, he's been caught in numerous explosions and falls that should've killed him plenty of times. To me, this new version is much more closer to Batman's opposite, because he's only a man as well, who wears a mask the same way Bruce does. He doesn't need any kind of chemical accident to make him crazy, after seeing the movie I suspect he isn't really crazy at all, he's just a criminal mastermind with zero motive or reason to his actions, a colorful terrorist, something that strikes without warning. No matter how evil the comic Joker is, he was normal at some point. "One bad day" made him, so in a sense, there's a level of sympathy there...somewhere. On the other hand, this new Joker doesn't have that underlying reason or tragedy, people have scars on their face all over the world and they aren't killers. All the scars did was give him his identity, just like the bats did for Bruce, the man he was before the scars could've been just as wild, except he had noone to match wits against. The great part is we'll never know for sure, and that's how it should be....

Except we can kind of surmise that something did happen to him to make him this way - from what he said to the bank manager as well as other things.

 

[Spade]

My problem with an origin like The Killing Joke's is that it's not interesting. A no-name comedian loses his wife, falls into some chemicals...and then goes insane? Oh, now he's bleached! Now, and only now, can he start on that killing spree! Wait...what?

The idea of losing his joy in life and then losing faith in order and justice straight afterward is a lot better. It's quick to the punch without the weight of expectations to match. That's why I like Nolan's Joker more than the others. All we know is that something made him snap, and that the clown getup was the product of a broken mind. That's scarier and more direct a background than the typical systematic approach we've seen of little things accumulating to create this character. That's not to say I don't like the comic book Joker; an origin is only so much. But Nolan fixed narrative bugs with the character that never really flowed in the books. That works for me.