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

[Boom]

You're right, but when you look at him and he's perma-white, he seems more( or less) than human.

That's the point.

 

[guitarkhero311]

You shoot ANY living thing in the head and it dies .

And, yeah, see the quote above. Nolan has no intention of humanizing the character.

Try to squeeze of rounds at Spider-Man, see how far that goes for you. And in Superman Returns, it is clear that superman's eye is bulletproof(as I am sure is the rest of his body)

 

[guitarkhero311]

That's the point.

In the comics, not the Nolan universe.

 

[Boom]

Try to squeeze of rounds at Spider-Man, see how far that goes for you. And in Superman Returns, it is clear that superman's eye is bulletproof(as I am sure is the rest of his body)

Superman isn't human.
Spider-Man has superhuman reflexes and the spider sense to warn him of danger moments before it happens. Still, that doesn't change the fact that if he were to get shot in the head, he would die.

You're seriously reaching if you're trying to compare The Joker to those two.

 

[guitarkhero311]

Superman isn't human.
Spider-Man is superhuman.

You're seriously reaching if you're trying to compare The Joker to those two.

That is my point. I am saying Nolan is trying to get the Joker as far from them as possible. Make him human in the human world that Batman lives in.

 

[Boom]

In the comics, not the Nolan universe.

...Which is the problem I'm having .

 

[nickyg641]

Permawhite doesn't give the Joker superpowers. It makes him less of a human in more of a figurative sense. But, really, we've got two different defenitions of "humanize". You mean that Nolan's idea was to make the Joker a man who chooses to become a symbol, more the parallel of Batman in that sense than the opposite.

Which, actually, is probably the true motive behind the choice. Not realism, but a change for the sake of creating a new dynamic between the characters; which is completely valid, much more so than "its better cuz of teh realizm!!1!". Doesn't mean I have to like it, but I find it valid.

Of course, I could be wrong about you, and you're just going about the realism argument in a very strange way.

 

[guitarkhero311]

...Which is the problem I'm having .

And I understand that, I am just giving my best reasoning on why Nolan is doing what he is doing. He has already established a world in Begins, he can't retcon it now to suit more comic like adaptations.

 

[Boom]

That is my point. I am saying Nolan is trying to get the Joker as far from them as possible. Make him human in the human world that Batman lives in.

...He already IS as far from them as possible. He is a normal, mortal being (that, and he's flatout evil). Makeup does not display that any more effectively than bleached skin.

My point is that permanent white skin reflects his personality more effectively than makeup. It is an absolute. It's unchanging. It cannot be taken away. It's dehumanizing.

 

[guitarkhero311]

Permawhite doesn't give the Joker superpowers. It makes him less of a human in more of a figurative sense. But, really, we've got two different defenitions of "humanize". You mean that Nolan's idea was to make the Joker a man who chooses to become a symbol, more the parallel of Batman in that sense than the opposite.

Which, actually, is probably the true motive behind the choice. Not realism, but a change for the sake of creating a new dynamic between the characters; which is completely valid, much more so than "its better cuz of teh realizm!!1!". Doesn't mean I have to like it, but I find it valid.

And thats all I am trying to say. I am not trying to prove anyone wrong, just giving my reasoning.

 

[guitarkhero311]

...He already IS as far from them as possible. He is a normal, mortal being (that, and he's flatout evil). Makeup does not display that any more effectively than bleached skin.

My point is that permanent white skin reflects his personality more effectively than makeup. It is an absolute. It's unchanging. It cannot be taken away. It's dehumanizing.

I KNOW. But what I am saying is I think NOLAN IS TRYING TO HUMANIZE HIM BY GIVING HIM MAKE UP, CREATING A JOKER THAT CHOOSES TO BE THE JOKER. If one looks at perma-white Joker they do see something that isn't quite human, which is the exact opposite of what I think Nolan is trying to do.

 

[guitarkhero311]

I have said this many times **** REALISM. I don't think that is what Noaln is trying to achieve, but rather humanize a character so that we can relate on a level that has never been done. Batman is human. In Gotham there are no super humans. So to give a man a super human quality, a look of sub or super human qualities (perma-white) refutes his whole outlook on the reboot of the franchise.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

You mean that Nolan's idea was to make the Joker a man who chooses to become a symbol, more the parallel of Batman in that sense than the opposite.

Which, actually, is probably the true motive behind the choice. Not realism, but a change for the sake of creating a new dynamic between the characters; which is completely valid, much more so than "its better cuz of teh realizm!!1!". Doesn't mean I have to like it, but I find it valid.

Exactly. That's been my theory since the get-go.

It's a change, but it works very well thematically, in the context of the film. Joker is the anti-Batman, a deliberate response to Batman's presence.

It's not the comics, but I think it's a worthwhile spin that still retains the crux of their relationship/opposing ideologies, i.e. chaos vs order.

 

[JayCaz]

I was pro perma-white skin for a while, but after reading certain posts I agree that it wouldn't fit in with Nolan's concept that Joker chooses to be what he is.

The perma-white skin wouldn't match up with the hacked smile, and if by some chance he did fall into chemicals that bleached his skin at any point in the movie, it'd all be a bit too coincidental if you couple it with the fact that he's already carved a big smile into his face & chosen the name 'Joker' - so I don't think it'll be happening.

 

[Dirt Like Me]

You're right, but when you look at him and he's perma-white, he seems more( or less) than human.

IN NARRATIVE TERMS. He still has the human aspect, they just don't want to show you the man before the Joker.

A Joker with white skin wouldn't necessarily have to come with an explanation. (After all, he didn't have an origin in Batman #1). He could just show up and start raising hell, which would keep with the "force of nature" thing that Nolan seems to be running with. That's what I'd like to see.

But I think that nickyg and Paste Pot Pete have it pegged pretty well: It's a change to try to explore the dynamic between the two characters from a different perspective. I don't know that such a shift was needed, but it'll be interesting to see how it unfolds.

 

[Clark Kent]

...Which is the problem I'm having .

Agreed. I plan on writing a Batman reboot script one day that strips away the reality and gets back to the fantasy.

if by some chance he did fall into chemicals that bleached his skin at any point in the movie, it'd all be a bit too coincidental if you couple it with the fact that he's already carved a big smile into his face & chosen the name 'Joker' - so I don't think it'll be happening.

Definitely not. At least, I seriously hope not. Let's just say that there is no shocking twist where his makeup is wiped away and it's revealed that he's permawhite underneath all the flesh tone, which is what I'm hoping for. If there is nothing like that, then that means that he's donned the purple suit, dyed his hair green, painted his face white, smeared his lips red, personalised his own deck of Joker cards, and called himself the Joker all on his own. If he were to then be dunked into toxic chemicals, and come out with his hair permagreen, his skin permawhite, and his lips permared, I think that the audience would probably vomit into their popcorn in shock at such a ridiculous bit of screenwriting. So that ain't gonna happen. Hopefully.

A Joker with white skin wouldn't necessarily have to come with an explanation. (After all, he didn't have an origin in Batman #1).

Exactly. What would be wrong with just having him permawhite without any explanation?

 

[guitarkhero311]

Agreed. I plan on writing a Batman reboot script one day that strips away the reality and gets back to the fantasy.



Definitely not. At least, I seriously hope not. Let's just say that there is no shocking twist where his makeup is wiped away and it's revealed that he's permawhite underneath all the flesh tone, which is what I'm hoping for. If there is nothing like that, then that means that he's donned the purple suit, dyed his hair green, painted his face white, smeared his lips red, personalised his own deck of Joker cards, and called himself the Joker all on his own. If he were to then be dunked into toxic chemicals, and come out with his hair permagreen, his skin permawhite, and his lips permared, I think that the audience would probably vomit into their popcorn in shock at such a ridiculous bit of screenwriting. So that ain't gonna happen. Hopefully.



Exactly. What would be wrong with just having him permawhite without any explanation?

To be honest with everyone here, I think it is pretty shallow to stick on this whole perma-white deal. You act as if Heath is running around laughing at you guys through out the whole movie screaming "IM NOT PERMA-WHITE!!"
"HAHAHAHAHA!" I mean clothes are designed to cover our bodies, so really, you don't know if the Joker from Batman #1 even is perma-white, you are just guessing. It wasn't until the origin that it was even a problem. It's apparent through interviews and from what we have seen that Nolan an Co. are not holstering the idea of an origin, so it shouldn't even matter that he wears make up, he has captured the character and when you look at him, you can say with out a doubt that he is the Joker.

 

[nickyg641]

To be honest with everyone here, I think it is pretty shallow to stick on this whole perma-white deal. You act as if Heath is running around laughing at you guys through out the whole movie screaming "IM NOT PERMA-WHITE!!"
"HAHAHAHAHA!" I mean clothes are designed to cover our bodies, so really, you don't know if the Joker from Batman #1 even is perma-white, you are just guessing. It wasn't until the origin that it was even a problem. It's apparent through interviews and from what we have seen that Nolan an Co. are not holstering the idea of an origin, so it shouldn't even matter that he wears make up, he has captured the character and when you look at him, you can say with out a doubt that he is the Joker.

From Batman #1.

 

[guitarkhero311]

From Batman #1.

Do you have the panels before this one.

 

[nickyg641]

Sorry, no. And I've no idea how to get my scanner working. But that is the final panel of Batman #1, a last-minute addendum after the Joker had supposedly met his death by accidentally stabbing himself.

 

[guitarkhero311]

Sorry, no. And I've no idea how to get my scanner working. But that is the final panel of Batman #1, a last-minute addendum after the Joker had supposedly met his death by accidentally stabbing himself.

Well I stand corrected. But my position on him not being perma-white in the movie still stands

 

[nickyg641]

Well I stand corrected. But my position on him not being perma-white in the movie still stands

Fair enough.

 

[Crook]

lolz

 

[super17]

Has Nolan ever publicly stated why he made the decision to make Joker have make-up opposed to the perma-white? I would really love to hear what he has to say on the whole matter, rather then just us making guesses at why he did what he did.

 

[alexdunn]

Has Nolan ever publicly stated why he made the decision to make Joker have make-up opposed to the perma-white? I would really love to hear what he has to say on the whole matter, rather then just us making guesses at why he did what he did.

Maybe he'll be perma-white in the end and he doesn't want to say he will be all makeup?