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

[BatmanFanatic]

Very good post. I do think The Joker works best when he's laughing and crazed for the majority of the time, because then when the smile disappears, and he gets serious, you know you're REALLY in trouble.

One thing I still remember from "The Shield", was Forest Whitaker's performance as Vic Mackey's nemesis, Internal Affairs lieutenant John Kavanaugh. For the first three episodes, he's all smiles and dopey grins, Whitaker playing the part of a "gee aw shucks" good ol' boy who's just here to do his job, so sorry for the inconvenience. Then, at the end of episode three, when he closes the door on Vic and you see him alone for the first time - BAM! - the smile goes out like a light, and he's absolutely serious and calculating.

I remember thinking it'd be really interesting if they tried something similar with The Joker. Where he's all "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!", a nutty, laughing wackjob in front of his henchmen/victims/whoever, then you see him, in a private moment, just kill the laugh and the smile like flicking a switch, and you get a real idea of the pure evil behind his grinning face.

Wow... that would be freakn' cool t: I pictured that in my head, it was AWESOME!

 

[bunk]

I think what bothered me initially about Joker not being permawhite, was the ability to remove the make-up and wash out the hair dye and essentially stop being Joker. Then I realized, a perma-white Joker can do the same by applying make-up and hair dye or a wig, like what Joker does in Batman '89. The only thing he can't disguise is his perma-grin. Which this new Joker can't really do either, because of the scarring. It does kind of even out. I would argue both versions are wearing a mask when they attempt to look "normal", whether it's achieved by removing make-up or putting it on.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

yea good point bunk. do you mean that his face without makeup is in fact his mask? sorta like batman that his mask is bruce wayne not batman as bruce waynes mask.

 

[BatmanFanatic]

Yah but this joker has to make a conscious effort to "be" joker when he gets up every morning.

That just doesn't seem right. Joker should be stuck being a freak unless he makes a special effort OTHERWISE. Not the other way around.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i dont think he has to make a effort to be the joker every mornin his face is ****ed up anyway. come to think of it now im not bothered about the permawhite thing but i think it would be awesome if his lips were red anyway. like the wounds are still sorta fresh and bloody. now that would deffs be betta than lipstick!

 

[nickyg641]

I think what bothered me initially about Joker not being permawhite, was the ability to remove the make-up and wash out the hair dye and essentially stop being Joker. Then I realized, a perma-white Joker can do the same by applying make-up and hair dye or a wig, like what Joker does in Batman '89. The only thing he can't disguise is his perma-grin. Which this new Joker can't really do either, because of the scarring. It does kind of even out. I would argue both versions are wearing a mask when they attempt to look "normal", whether it's achieved by removing make-up or putting it on.

What bothers me is the ability of others to wipe off the makeup. It's like taking away one of his greatest weapons. And I'm still not keen on seeing the Joker sans-makeup, which we apparently will be seeing in the film.

And, anyway, I was doing some thinking about a particular direction the argument has gone in the past. It's rather a non-sequitor, but, whatever. Many compared the permawhite argument to the "organic vs. mechanical web-shooters" argument that took place when Spiderman was released. I would say it's not exactly the same thing. It would be more akin to if Peter Parker, in the comics, invented all of the spider-abilities himself, and, in the movie, they were the result of a radioactive spider-bite. In Spiderman the movie, his origin was still 90% in tact, they just took the one thing that he did himself and made it a part of the "spider bite package".

 

[CaptainClown]

i dont think he has to make a effort to be the joker every mornin his face is ****ed up anyway. come to think of it now im not bothered about the permawhite thing but i think it would be awesome if his lips were red anyway. like the wounds are still sorta fresh and bloody. now that would deffs be betta than lipstick!

well he doesn't look like a guy who sleeps so him freshening up every morning doesn't really happen.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

yea and that spiderman thing was a massive improvment. i mean whats the point of having all these spider powers but then when it comes to the thing that spiders are most known for......he invents a web shooter! now i dont care what any one says the comics were stupid on that part!

 

[SheldonLevene]

What bothers me is the ability of others to wipe off the makeup. It's like taking away one of his greatest weapons. And I'm still not keen on seeing the Joker sans-makeup, which we apparently will be seeing in the film.

And, anyway, I was doing some thinking about a particular direction the argument has gone in the past. It's rather a non-sequitor, but, whatever. Many compared the permawhite argument to the "organic vs. mechanical web-shooters" argument that took place when Spiderman was released. I would say it's not exactly the same thing. It would be more akin to if Peter Parker, in the comics, invented all of the spider-abilities himself, and, in the movie, they were the result of a radioactive spider-bite. In Spiderman the movie, his origin was still 90% in tact, they just took the one thing that he did himself and made it a part of the "spider bite package".

Oh wow I've never read a Spiderman comic. I did not know that bit of info. Neat lol. Back to the topic folks lol.

 

[Solidus]

Yah but this joker has to make a conscious effort to "be" joker when he gets up every morning.

That just doesn't seem right. Joker should be stuck being a freak unless he makes a special effort OTHERWISE. Not the other way around.

I was thinking about pulling up my two page report on how this is not true. But I know lots have seen it numerous times.

But you have no idea of that what so ever. There are people that wake up every morning, *even people I know* that think there is something wrong with them, and they have no physical deformation what so ever. Either it be psychos, rape victims ect. They don't wake up every morning and go, I want to be these things every day. Its a mental thing. Most psychos, don't wake up and pump them selves up to be that way, its a psychological issue. I think some people on these boards are too superficial to understand this. True psychos don't need to have physical deformations to make them nuts. And though this Joker has a physical deformation *If you want me to pull up my old post I will*. This Joker is still mentally the Joker no matter what.

Like Two-Face in TDKR, he got surgery to make his physical deformation go away, yet he was still Two-Face mentally, and always will be. Same if the permawhite Joker in the comics decided to get plastic surgery and change his face, no matter what he did, he would still be the Joker.

Its not something he has to pump him self up to be, or look in the mirror. People look in the mirror who are normal people and see them selves as a serial killer, and a monster, and no one can change that about them. Sadly enough.

 

[CaptainClown]

I was thinking about pulling up my two page report on how this is not true. But I know lots have seen it numerous times.

But you have no idea of that what so ever. There are people that wake up every morning, *even people I know* that think there is something wrong with them, and they have no physical deformation what so ever. Either it be psychos, rape victims ect. They don't wake up every morning and go, I want to be these things every day. Its a mental thing. Most psychos, don't wake up and pump them selves up to be that way, its a psychological issue. I think some people on these boards are too superficial to understand this. True psychos don't need to have physical deformations to make them nuts. And though this Joker has a physical deformation *If you want me to pull up my old post I will*. This Joker is still mentally the Joker no matter what.

Like Two-Face in TDKR, he got surgery to make his physical deformation go away, yet he was still Two-Face mentally, and always will be. Same if the permawhite Joker in the comics decided to get plastic surgery and change his face, no matter what he did, he would still be the Joker.

Its not something he has to pump him self up to be, or look in the mirror. People look in the mirror who are normal people and see them selves as a serial killer, and a monster, and no one can change that about them. Sadly enough.

(rapist looks in a mirror)
"Come on Jon today we are going to rape 3 people. I am a good rapist I am a good rapist I am a good rapist I am a good rapist. Aw whats the use I can't do it =("

 

[Solidus]

What bothers me is the ability of others to wipe off the makeup. It's like taking away one of his greatest weapons. And I'm still not keen on seeing the Joker sans-makeup, which we apparently will be seeing in the film.

And, anyway, I was doing some thinking about a particular direction the argument has gone in the past. It's rather a non-sequitor, but, whatever. Many compared the permawhite argument to the "organic vs. mechanical web-shooters" argument that took place when Spiderman was released. I would say it's not exactly the same thing. It would be more akin to if Peter Parker, in the comics, invented all of the spider-abilities himself, and, in the movie, they were the result of a radioactive spider-bite. In Spiderman the movie, his origin was still 90% in tact, they just took the one thing that he did himself and made it a part of the "spider bite package".

You may think that thats not a big deal my friend. But there are people on the internet that would argue just as you do with the permawhite that the (mechanical webshooters) are essential to the Peter Parker character, trust me on that. I in my 5 years of being here, during the Spidey 2 hype that was a thread that was just like this one, and raged on for a long while.

 

[Solidus]

(rapist looks in a mirror)
"Come on Jon today we are going to rape 3 people. I am a good rapist I am a good rapist I am a good rapist I am a good rapist. Aw whats the use I can't do it =("

LOL

 

[StylishHokie21]

What bothers me is the ability of others to wipe off the makeup. It's like taking away one of his greatest weapons. And I'm still not keen on seeing the Joker sans-makeup, which we apparently will be seeing in the film.

And, anyway, I was doing some thinking about a particular direction the argument has gone in the past. It's rather a non-sequitor, but, whatever. Many compared the permawhite argument to the "organic vs. mechanical web-shooters" argument that took place when Spiderman was released. I would say it's not exactly the same thing. It would be more akin to if Peter Parker, in the comics, invented all of the spider-abilities himself, and, in the movie, they were the result of a radioactive spider-bite. In Spiderman the movie, his origin was still 90% in tact, they just took the one thing that he did himself and made it a part of the "spider bite package".

Agreed. The look has pretty much grown on me though.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

yea but i think that spidey thing is stupid IMO. i would actually go far to say that the comics even though they been goin 50 years or woteva made a mistake. how can a superhero who has been given all the powers of a spider except the main talent that a spider posseses! the film version made it better

 

[Crook]

You minds as well complain about why Peter didn't have 8 limbs.

There is no biological basis for webs coming out of a human's wrists, if he were to attain this arachnid trait. If anything, it would come out of his mouth, or like the spider, out of his backside. Not a pretty sight.

 

[ctkwilson]

I am primarily focused on the psychology of the character. Based on what I have seen in the trailers I would say this is the most "spot on" interpretation of Mr. Joker to date.

You can put "perma white" on anyone and paint a smile on their face. The real question is, do they have the mental aspects of Joker intact. Obviously Mr. Ledger did his homework.

I just hope we don't get hit with a pie in the face... Let's all hope the film lives up to the hype.

 

[deathfromabove]

Yah but this joker has to make a conscious effort to "be" joker when he gets up every morning.

That just doesn't seem right. Joker should be stuck being a freak unless he makes a special effort OTHERWISE. Not the other way around.

yeah maybe they could give him a nasty scar on his face or something.

 

[nickyg641]

You minds as well complain about why Peter didn't have 8 limbs.

There is no biological basis for webs coming out of a human's wrists, if he were to attain this arachnid trait. If anything, it would come out of his mouth, or like the spider, out of his backside. Not a pretty sight.

I can see where he's coming from, and I guess I kind of agree. He gets a spider's power to crawl on walls, their strength, and their...precognitive abilities huh, but not the trait most associated with Spiders? I mean, if you think about it, he could have been bitten by a lizard and it would have had the same effects.

 

[bunk]

Yah but this joker has to make a conscious effort to "be" joker when he gets up every morning.

That just doesn't seem right. Joker should be stuck being a freak unless he makes a special effort OTHERWISE. Not the other way around.

I kind of look at it like he always sees himself as a permanent clown, only he has to continually "adjust" his appearance to look that way to everyone. Of course I haven't seen the movie, so who knows really.

 

[deathfromabove]

I hear what you guys are saying, and yes he does laugh after a lot of his nastiness, so perhaps the best way I can explain what I mean is in comparison to Mark Hamil, who is off-the-wall LOONY. That's kind of how I think of joker, completely MANIC all the time, incapable of sitting down and having serious brooding moments... that sort of joker I don't picture him getting all grim and dark and suddenly sane before a "board meeting" of mob-bosses to give them the "grand plan."

I'm not saying I don't enjoy this version, because so far I do, but when I think of the comics joker, Hamil, Jack, it's far more nutty that Heaths...and you have to agree there, even if you don't prefer that.

far more nutty? i dont agree.

http://moretrailers.highresolutions.info/dk03.html

"i love this job"

i see the joker. 100%.

game over.

 

[CaptainClown]

far more nutty? i dont agree.

http://moretrailers.highresolutions.info/dk03.html

"i love this job"

i see the joker. 100%.

game over.

wow thanks for that I have never seen that. So freakin awesome.

 

[Saint]

far more nutty? i dont agree.

http://moretrailers.highresolutions.info/dk03.html

"i love this job"

i see the joker. 100%.

game over.

Ha! That's incredibly cool.

 

[nickyg641]

You can tell both Heath and the Joker are having an utter ball. And does anybody see a lot of Jim Carrey when the Joker says "Poor choice of words"? I love that.

 

[Crook]

far more nutty? i dont agree.

http://moretrailers.highresolutions.info/dk03.html

"i love this job"

i see the joker. 100%.

game over.

Whoo! Bar none my favorite trailer and best use of depicting the Joker.

This serves to point out B_F's point, however. There is a clear difference between how Joker acts in that spot and the entire first trailer. That spot is pretty much how I'd like to see Joker act most of the time. I'm glad Heath has embraced that part of the character.