The Dark Knight To Bleach or Not to Bleach? That is the Question

[The Shape]

Cleary not, because he has "skin coloured makeup on", as you said. Did you drag your eyes over the rest of the paragraph?

The make-up (along with his facial deformity) IS his permanent face, and he obviously only removed it to execute a goal, just as the Joker in the comics covered his face with felsh-colored make-up to do the same.

It's really the same idea. In fact, the entire idea behind TDK Joker and the classic "perma-white" Joker is almost exactly the same, but it's just executed differently.

 

[Harmonica]

This Joker will be the worst live action Joker ever. Everything I've seen so far has suggested that they think Joker is some "badass" he waves guns around and wears paint to scare people.

 

[regwec]

It isn't the same if the opposite element is removable. A man who is crippled but pretends to be able-bodied is not the same as a fit man who pretends to be lame.

 

[Leon the Professional]

Perhaps he shut his eyes? I'll bet he tried not to breath in as he hit the chemical vat, also.

When you're suddenly accidentally falling into a vat of chemicals, I doubt you are going to think in those 2 seconds "I better shut my eyes and mouth as tight as I can," because you are too busy screaming in shock and panic. Plus if you're submerged in bleaching chemicals, I doubt your eyelids would give you full proof protection. You actually bring up the good point that he would also most likely swallow and aspirate bleach, which would burn through his insides.

 

[Octoberist]

This Joker will be the worst live action Joker ever. Everything I've seen so far has suggested that they think Joker is some "badass" he waves guns around and wears paint to scare people.

sure...

 

[Jesster32388]

This Joker will be the worst live action Joker ever. Everything I've seen so far has suggested that they think Joker is some "badass" he waves guns around and wears paint to scare people.

 

[bonesawmcgraw]

This Joker will be the worst live action Joker ever. Everything I've seen so far has suggested that they think Joker is some "badass" he waves guns around and wears paint to scare people.

Come on, worse than Romero and Nicholson? I think not. Actually, I quite like this one. Joker to me is the ultimate bad-ass, and I like that.

 

[Harmonica]

Jack played the Joker with subtly and grace. This Joker is trying way too hard to be a badass. It sucks.

 

[ronny]

It's a contentious point. And what's going on with the fingers of his right hand? Who knows.

He's been working with chemicals either to create bombs or Joker venom. Therefore parts of him are permanently white.
Splotchy and uneven but yes, I believe he is, in part, discoloured.
The next step is then to arrange a robbery in a place you know has chemicals and then jump right in. Taking that next step and fully evolving into the character you've created.
Yes. That would work.

 

[Figs]

Jack played the Joker with subtly and grace. This Joker is trying way too hard to be a badass. It sucks.

The Joker of the comics was always a badass anyways so I don't see what your getting at other than trolling.

 

[Harmonica]

Come on, worse than Romero and Nicholson? I think not. Actually, I quite like this one. Joker to me is the ultimate bad-ass, and I like that.

Joker shouldn't be a badass. I hate that word. I swear, fanboys would be happy if Joker ran away from an explosion and put on sunglasses.

 

[Magenta666]

Jack played the Joker with subtly and grace. This Joker is trying way too hard to be a badass. It sucks.

aheh heh heh

 

[The Shape]

It isn't the same if the opposite element is removable. A man who is crippled but pretends to be able-bodied is not the same as a fit man who pretends to be lame.

That's not an accurate analogy. You have to look at it from this standpoint: The makeup is permanent in his mind. He never takes it off, lets it rot on his face, and only removes it to disguise himself as a civilian, or in this film's case, a police officer, just as the Joker from the comics only deviates from his normal physical state to do similar things.

Once that man has been scarred with his twisted smile, he is the Joker, just as in the comics he is literally turned into a clown. In the comics, he comes out of that acid bath looking straight up like a clown, and he takes on the persona of the Joker that he creates in his mind. The same happens in TDK, but with more subtlety. He emerges from an experience with that scarred smile, and in his mind, he manifests the persona of the Joker. I find this pretty interesting, because, though the scars are permanent, he takes it upon himself to take the clownish appearance.

 

[thewhyteman]

This obsession with "realism" has got to be toned down. Especially when dealing with a concept like Batman. Batman may be more realistic than most superheroes, but that's not saying much. If you are unable to suspend your disbelief for some of the mythology's elements, how do you suspend your disbelief for the character the mythology revolves around?

Permawhite skin is not an impossible concept. It is possible for people to bleach themselves, as evidenced by Michael Jackson. You can color your skin via plastic surgery, tattoing, or even skin dye, and it can be somewhat permanent.

Now, permawhite from a chemical bath may be a bit more absurd, but when you look at the kinds of things chemicals can do to skin or other material...it's just not that farfetched a concept.

Nolan used makeup. He chose to do so instead of using permawhite, just as he chose to use segmented armor instead of something a little more subtle. It's simply his choice, there is "This is why it HAS to be used in THIS franchise" argument that anyone can make. It is simply down to personal taste and a filmmaker's choice. This is a concept that any reasonable person should realize. That both "concepts" of The Joker's appearance can be rationalized in a fairly realistic manner.

The makeup is just that, makeup. It's used not because Nolan wanted to use something more realistic than permawhite, but because he felt The Joker should wear makeup. Odds are there is a reason for this, and I would imagine it's the metaphor behind it.

I like the idea of The Joker being permawhite with no explanation, or even via the chemicals. I like the idea of The Joker wearing makeup. I don't like the actual visuals they have chosen to employ in THE DARK KNIGHT. It just screams of a design team that needed The Joker to look "extreme" and couldn't be subtle about it on any level.

I agree with your argument until you get to the part about what Nolan wanted. Why do so many people feel that they know what Nolan is setting out to do or the reasons for his actions? Ive seen no interview where Nolan gives reason for his Joker. So Nolan may well have felt that makeup is a little more realistic then a nice pretty evenly toned pure white, not light caucasion bleached skin.

 

[regwec]

When you're suddenly accidentally falling into a vat of chemicals, I doubt you are going to think in those 2 seconds "I better shut my eyes and mouth as tight as I can,"

Of course you would. Have you ever been swimming? Both reactions are completely instantaneous when contact with fluid is realized or anticipated.

Plus if you're submerged in bleaching chemicals, I doubt your eyelids would give you full proof protection.

It depends how corrosive the chemicals were, but there's no reason why they wouldn't. Millions of years of evolution have given us closeable eyes and mouths.

You actually bring up the good point that he would also most likely swallow and aspirate bleach, which would burn through his insides.

Why would he decide to swallow bleach?

 

[bonesawmcgraw]

Joker shouldn't be a badass. I hate that word. I swear, fanboys would be happy if Joker ran away from an explosion and put on sunglasses.

You know what, that would be a pretty cool scenario, even though the response was probably meant to be sardonic. You should think about writing the next Batman script.

 

[Harmonica]

No, I suck at writing. I'm incoherent at all times.

 

[bonesawmcgraw]

Jack played the Joker with subtly and grace. This Joker is trying way too hard to be a badass. It sucks.

As subtle as an elephant in a living room, and as graceful as nails on a chalk board.

 

[Solidus]

Joker shouldn't be a badass. I hate that word. I swear, fanboys would be happy if Joker ran away from an explosion and put on sunglasses.

You made your point, and now your starting to criticize those majority who like this Joker. Careful you could get in trouble for trolling.


Does anyone else feel like......Googleme has been reincarnated?

 

[ronny]

Jack played the Joker with subtly and grace. This Joker is trying way too hard to be a badass. It sucks.

Jack was the perfect choice but then Burton robbed him of his ability to do the best he could. An actors face an important tool, and what happened? Burton took that face, gave it a stupid prosthetic and screwed Jack in what could have been an even better role.
Oh, and if that wasn't enough, instead of giving The Joker a song that suited him we had him dancing to Prince. The Nicholson Joker is an artisan, he's a cultured guy who just so happens to be a mass murderer. He would not dance to any old thing, it would have to be something that fitted his egotistical personality.
And then there's the violence.
Here's the problem, apart from the look and certain aspects of the costume, Jack's Joker fails in doing anything really shocking. The reason is that the violence is so cartoony. This from the same director who in Sleepy Hollow showed decapitation after decapitation. Maybe he had little choice in the matter, I'm not sure. But if Burton had The Joker acting as vile as he did in The Killing Joke (A comic the director apparently likes) than things would have been better all around.
The only solution is to make a movie version of The Dark Knight Returns and bring Nicholson back, use him whilst you can. He's an amazing performer and shouldn't be crippled by a damn permanent smile.
Watch The Departed. The man can still go.

 

[Harmonica]

As subtle as an elephant in a living room, and as graceful as nails on a chalk board.

He wasn't graceful? His movements were incredible. The dance scene in particular was wonderful. The scene wouldn't be half as funny/messed up if Jack hadn't done such a good job.

 

[ronny]

He wasn't graceful? His movements were incredible. The dance scene in particular was wonderful. The scene wouldn't be half as funny/messed up if Jack hadn't done such a good job.

Okay, listen carefully: The dance scene was an advertisment for Prince!
It was merely so that mincing little weirdo could add to the giant pile of money he sits on whilst sneering at us, the little people.
The Joker in Batman 89 would nto dance to something like that. Maybe in the 1960s, maybe when he was doing surf contests and hiding people in dustbins. But not when he was trying to be cultured and refined. I mean, wasn't he wearing a beret in one scene? Tells you all you need to know.

 

[The Shape]

You made your point, and now your starting to criticize those majority who like this Joker. Careful you could get in trouble for trolling.


Does anyone else feel like......Googleme has been reincarnated?

No, this guy's spelling, puncuation, and grammar are all better than GoogleMe's.

 

[regwec]

You made your point, and now your starting to criticize those majority who like this Joker. Careful you could get in trouble for trolling.


Does anyone else feel like......Googleme has been reincarnated?

No, nor is there any reason to be so hostile towards him at this stage.

 

[Solidus]

No, nor is there any reason to be so hostile towards him at this stage.

I was not hostile towards him. That must just be how you see it. I warned him that criticizing others such as he was, down the road it could get him in trouble. So. Don't get what your trying to "get hostile" towards me with t: