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

[BatmanFanatic]

The answer is "not to bleach", my reason: Heath Ledger's version is more the Joker than any previous incarnation in the history of Batman.
IMO

Wait, so if he had a different style of makeup on, he wouldn't be as good of an actor? That makes no sense. The coloring has nothing to do with his performance.

 

[BatmanFanatic]

Sometimes you "realism" advocates slay me. You think the general public wouldn't buy bleached skin?

Did Pirates of the Caribbean 2: Dead Man's Chest scream "realistic" to you? And how much money did that movie make?

That was awesome.

It's true, no one cares if a movie is realistic, what people really care about is that a movie is good. Isn't that what we all ultimately want in the end? A GOOD movie, no matter how it's done? Obviously the real hard core fanboys and girls are going to want as much comic book faithfulness as possible (like me) but in the end it has to be great storytelling. Because exactly where would we be if all the physical details about the characters were right and the story was crap and the film was lame? It would be even worse.

I hope for whatever they change from the comic cannon they make up for it by making a spectacular film that wins the obsessive fans over to their side.

 

[horrorwriter]

And we don't know for a fact that an element of surprise may await us by the end of this film. Subliminally, this movie "seems" as though vindication through masks is necessary. The Joker's Face...Two Faces face...Batman's face... it may turn out by the end of the film that the Joker's face becomes permanent. I highly doubt it, but whom is to say otherwise?

In my opinion the joker was done this way so it wouldn't duplicate Batman 89. I think the bleach theory is equally as creepy as a man wearing the make-up. Both theories does not make a prolific killer. The Joker is the Joker because of who he is. What he portrays is a different story. Take the band KISS for example. For the fans that like their music, they would play the same music without the theatrics. The theatrics add to the act. The Joker ( and this is just my opinion) wants to terrify people in many ways. One of these ways is his face.

I personally like the take of him applying his own makeup. I don't concur however that it's creepier then a person who is scarred that way by bleach or chemicals. As a matter of fact, if I was bleached by chemicals or hideously scarred like two face, I would be killing everyone. Not because they deserved it, but because they didn't look like me.

 

[itsthebatman]

That was awesome.

It's true, no one cares if a movie is realistic, what people really care about is that a movie is good. Isn't that what we all ultimately want in the end? A GOOD movie, no matter how it's done? Obviously the real hard core fanboys and girls are going to want as much comic book faithfulness as possible (like me) but in the end it has to be great storytelling. Because exactly where would we be if all the physical details about the characters were right and the story was crap and the film was lame? It would be even worse.

I hope for whatever they change from the comic cannon they make up for it by making a spectacular film that wins the obsessive fans over to their side.

Preach it, sister. This is why things like make-up Joker and jigsaw puzzle Batsuit don't bother me that much - these are, to my mind, details in a much greater picture where everything else pretty much screams awesomeness. Joker's physical nature may not be what most of us wanted, but his characterisation seems spot on, and Heath's performance will surely knock it out of the park. Given the choice (and, yes, I'd rather there were no choice), I'll take an involving story with a good and involving story and characters over a dull and sterile literal comic-book translation.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Preach it, sister. This is why things like make-up Joker and jigsaw puzzle Batsuit don't bother me that much - these are, to my mind, details in a much greater picture where everything else pretty much screams awesomeness. Joker's physical nature may not be what most of us wanted, but his characterisation seems spot on, and Heath's performance will surely knock it out of the park. Given the choice (and, yes, I'd rather there were no choice), I'll take an involving story with a good and involving story and characters over a dull and sterile literal comic-book translation.

Not to barge in on the discussion but I couldnt agree with you more on the matter, and just had to say so!

 

[itsthebatman]

Not to barge in on the discussion but I couldnt agree with you more on the matter, and just had to say so!

All constructive comments (and especially ego-swelling praise) are much welcomed. Barge away!

 

[Aidan2209]

Sometimes you "realism" advocates slay me. You think the general public wouldn't buy bleached skin?

Did Pirates of the Caribbean 2: Dead Man's Chest scream "realistic" to you? And how much money did that movie make?

It's more about the tone that's already been established. Dead Man's Chest was a fantasy film, and while superhero films could be argued to be a fantasy subgenre, Begins, I'd say, falls somewhere between superhero film and crime film. A more "realistic" tone has been established.

I know, how realistic can you get when your protagonist dresses up as a giant bat to single-handedly beat up criminals? But there was a level of plausibility in the way it was presented. Of course there were "unrealistic" elements in the story - basically every film has unrealistic elements, even more sensible dramas. A story like Batman's is more fantastic, by nature.

But I'm sure most people would find it quite jarring if, in one of these Batman films, an experiment caused a character to become half-man, half bat - that sounds more like something from the more fantastic and tongue-in-cheek Spider-Man movies. In keeping with the tone established in the first film, the more fantastic elements from the comic books would simply not fit.

As for The Joker, whom this thread is obviously about, I don't think bleached skin would cross that threshold of being "too unrealistic" for inclusion in these movies. But there are reasons for his wearing make-up in this film, even though we may not fully realise them until we see the film. The way The Joker is presented in terms of his history, or lack thereof, may be one of these reasons. The fact that he has a cut smile and paints his face certainly raises questions, but a more fantastic deformity, like bleached skin, would demand an explanation. But Nolan doesn't want to give us such an explanation. He wants The Joker to be more of a mystery, which is refreshing given the current trend toward excessive backstory (Hannibal Rising, to name an example). I think Nolan's been quoted as calling him "a force of nature", or something along those lines, a creature that cannot be understood.

And so, the decision to have The Joker wear make-up in this film, I believe, has more reason than simply, "bleached skin is too unrealistic". However, I would say that there are some characters, story arcs, etc. which would be too unrealistic to comfortably fit into the universe they've established with these films.

That was a pretty long post. Goodnight, folks.

 

[Gianakin_]

To me, realistic is about trying to give some explanation about the gadgets, events, motivations etc. and not resorting to "F*** it, it's a comic book. It can be done. Deal with it".

You know, like when Quesada eff'd up the Marvel Universe via Mephisto and said to Straczinski (sp) "Why have rules to Mephisto's deal? F*** it, it's magic!"

 

[Eggyman]

To me, realistic is about trying to give some explanation about the gadgets, events, motivations etc. and not resorting to "F*** it, it's a comic book. It can be done. Deal with it".

You know, like when Quesada eff'd up the Marvel Universe via Mephisto and said to Straczinski (sp) "Why have rules to Mephisto's deal? F*** it, it's magic!"

You gotta have balance though, mate. If you don't, and there's nothing but explanations throughout, you've got a documentary on your hands.

 

[Gianakin_]

You gotta have balance though, mate. If you don't, and there's nothing but explanations throughout, you've got a documentary on your hands.

You're absolutely right. The above was my interpretation of Nolan's "realism", as opposed to the application of the word's literal meaning to the film (visually, or whatever).

 

[Eggyman]

You're absolutely right. The above was my interpretation of Nolan's "realism", as opposed to the application of the word's literal meaning to the film (visually, or whatever).

Buzzin'

 

[~.:/|T-MaN|\:.~]

Quote:
The Joker is a villain, and a scary one at that. Jack Nicholsons bleached joker was not even close to as scary-villainous as Heaths and no one can argue that.


And it has nothing to do with being bleached or not. If you don't realize this, well, then you are beyond help.
__________________

Sure it does. Its all part of the look. Heaths Joker looks scary; His eye makeup, his makeup around the cutmouth, and his painted white face. Yeah his hair is dramatically different too, but the new look is all in the face. And the face is what caught peoples eyes in the first teaser image, the face is what we sawon the empire cover, when reporters on CNN said "Clearly he totally took this character in a new direction". If the face was permawhite there wouldnt be as much of a contast between Nicholson and Ledger. And this debate wouldnt even be worth having.

 

[Saint]

Sure it does. Its all part of the look. Heaths Joker looks scary; His eye makeup, his makeup around the cutmouth, and his painted white face. Yeah his hair is dramatically different too, but the new look is all in the face.

If you think the look is what makes him frightening, well... that's just silly.

If the face was permawhite there wouldnt be as much of a contast between Nicholson and Ledger.

Except in, uh, their performances. You know, the important part.

 

[nickyg641]

It's more about the tone that's already been established. Dead Man's Chest was a fantasy film, and while superhero films could be argued to be a fantasy subgenre, Begins, I'd say, falls somewhere between superhero film and crime film. A more "realistic" tone has been established.

I know, how realistic can you get when your protagonist dresses up as a giant bat to single-handedly beat up criminals? But there was a level of plausibility in the way it was presented. Of course there were "unrealistic" elements in the story - basically every film has unrealistic elements, even more sensible dramas. A story like Batman's is more fantastic, by nature.

But I'm sure most people would find it quite jarring if, in one of these Batman films, an experiment caused a character to become half-man, half bat - that sounds more like something from the more fantastic and tongue-in-cheek Spider-Man movies. In keeping with the tone established in the first film, the more fantastic elements from the comic books would simply not fit.

As for The Joker, whom this thread is obviously about, I don't think bleached skin would cross that threshold of being "too unrealistic" for inclusion in these movies. But there are reasons for his wearing make-up in this film, even though we may not fully realise them until we see the film. The way The Joker is presented in terms of his history, or lack thereof, may be one of these reasons. The fact that he has a cut smile and paints his face certainly raises questions, but a more fantastic deformity, like bleached skin, would demand an explanation. But Nolan doesn't want to give us such an explanation. He wants The Joker to be more of a mystery, which is refreshing given the current trend toward excessive backstory (Hannibal Rising, to name an example). I think Nolan's been quoted as calling him "a force of nature", or something along those lines, a creature that cannot be understood.

And so, the decision to have The Joker wear make-up in this film, I believe, has more reason than simply, "bleached skin is too unrealistic". However, I would say that there are some characters, story arcs, etc. which would be too unrealistic to comfortably fit into the universe they've established with these films.

That was a pretty long post. Goodnight, folks.

I think that, because of the fact that it does warrent an explanation and we obviously aren't getting one, makes him that much more of an enigma. And if an explanation is needed, but not necessarily an origin, simply have the characters speculate briefly in the same vague, pseudo-scientific manner as the microwave emitter and pretty much all of Wayne's suit technology.

 

[~.:/|T-MaN|\:.~]

If you think the look is what makes him frightening, well... that's just silly.


Except in, uh, their performances. You know, the important part.

Of course, but this thread is all about looks: "To bleach or not to bleach" so I'm just going to go ahead and stay on topic with what I said.

 

[~.:/|T-MaN|\:.~]

Their performances aren't in question here, their looks are... and in particular, their skin.

-sorry4doublepost

 

[nickyg641]

Does the appearance of white skin because of makeup really make him that much scarier than white skin all over?

And, I must ask, would you have made a complaint had Nolan gone in the direction of permawhite? I just can't imagine many people going, "Goddamnit Nolan, what are you doing? White skin? You're destroying my beloved character!"

 

[alexdunn]

I'm still thinking the twist at the end of the movie will be that Joker goes through a transformation and becomes "permi-white". All this talk about it being more creepy that he applies the makeup himself, but what if he made himself "permi-white" with some chemical. You never know.

 

[Hole Shot]

I'm still thinking the twist at the end of the movie will be that Joker goes through a transformation and becomes "permi-white". All this talk about it being more creepy that he applies the makeup himself, but what if he made himself "permi-white" with some chemical. You never know.

I just don't think that's much of a twist. All of us dweebs would go "WOOOOO-HOOOOOO, HE'S PERMAWHITE" everyone else would be like "eh?"

Do I think the Joker should be permawhite? Yes. Was I annoyed with the first pictures we got? Yes. Do I think you could have a guy with pale white skin and not have to offer an explanation? Yes. Do I think making the Joker bleached would have screwed up the atmosphere Nolan was trying to create in his grounded in realism Batworld? No.

Despite all that, after seeing what I've seen of Heath's performance have I been able to see past all those gripes above? OH HELL YES!!!

 

[alexdunn]

I just don't think that's much of a twist. All of us dweebs would go "WOOOOO-HOOOOOO, HE'S PERMAWHITE" everyone else would be like "eh?"

Do I think the Joker should be permawhite? Yes. Was I annoyed with the first pictures we got? Yes. Do I think you could have a guy with pale white skin and not have to offer an explanation? Yes. Do I think making the Joker bleached would have screwed up the atmosphere Nolan was trying to create in his grounded in realism Batworld? No.

Despite all that, after seeing what I've seen of Heath performance have been able to see past all those gripes above? OH HELL YES!!!

Agreed.

 

[Banquet]

In Batman one of the most visually "shocking" moments for Nicholson's Joker was when the flesh-toned paint was running down his face. The white makeup makes for a lot of possibilities in changing the Joker's appearence and composure scene by scene, which is more reflective of the unstable, anarchic, and possibly schizophrenic Joker. It just seems that making him permawhite would be faithful to the comics, but stifling to the movie.

 

[zmystico]

I agree with you Banquet, its not that we can't or won't enjoy the movie because the Joker wears white face, but its the fact that in the comics its not white face, his skin is actually white.

 

[nickyg641]

In Batman one of the most visually "shocking" moments for Nicholson's Joker was when the flesh-toned paint was running down his face. The white makeup makes for a lot of possibilities in changing the Joker's appearence and composure scene by scene, which is more reflective of the unstable, anarchic, and possibly schizophrenic Joker. It just seems that making him permawhite would be faithful to the comics, but stifling to the movie.

I find that the most striking thing about the Joker's makeup is not the flesh showing through, but the dripping and smearing of the black and red makeup, giving him the wrinkled appearance. This could be easily compatible with permawhite, with the Joker being both bleached and applying his black and red makeup. To me, that would be perfect, because you get the interesting and gritty visual, the dynamic of the deformity (which is already present in the cut smile, it would just be exaggerated), and the dynamic of the Joker creating his persona.

 

[guitarkhero311]

Forget realism, forget Nolan. The Joker has been a character that has lasted decades. The Joker I have come to know and love is the one that is truly a menace to Batman. The golden age, silly Joker is not the one I relate to. I like my Joker to be a fanatic, serial killing clown, the anti-Batman. The one who tries to undo Batman rather than the one who robs banks for personal gain. Thats what makes him his arch-nemesis, not because hes a criminal, but because he is out to destroy Batman and everything he believes in. To me the character comes first. If Oprah were cast in this movie as the Joker, and she had no make up,just the costume and the character, and if she nailed character like the comics and made it kick ass, I would not have a problem. If she captured the Joker's essence, then she would be the Joker. So I have no problem with Heath's Joker. He seems to have become the Joker, and since he at least tried to resemble the Joker i.e. green hair, white face, red lips, I have absolutely no problem with him not being perma-white. The character is true, crazy, and just plain bad-ass from what I have seen. Sure the accident made the Joker in the comics, but what makes the Joker for me is the character, that insane, zero empathy that makes the Joker such an icon.

 

[Some Dude]

Nolan is trying to achieve believability in these movies, not realism.

I would imagine that Nolan simply decided that a Joker that wears makeup would be a lot more believable than one bleached by mysteries chemicals, especially to the general audience.

I feel that a makeup wearing Joker works best with the Batman and world Nolan has created. Otherwise, it's pretty much a non-issue for me.