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

[nogster]

i loved the film....seen it 4 times..and the joker was brilliantly executed....
but, he couldve easily been permawhite...and it wouldntve taken anything away from the character or film at all..
its explained that there is no history of the joker,
"no name, no alias, just knives and lint"
why not keep him permawhite, it wouldve added to the mystery of this character, no need to explain it, as nothing else about him was...
he is simply the joker, an agent of chaos, a force of nature....

i think permawhite couldve and shouldve been in the film..

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i dont think he could be perma-white per se, but maybe having him just a really unhealthy pale colour, like he hasnt been out in daylight for like years and years.

 

[hatebox]

I guess it was to emphasize the fact that, basically, the Joker is just a normal person like us. And that makes him scarier. If he were permawhite he'd appear alien, and we could say 'oh, he's obviously a freak' and it'd be an easy get-out clause for the audience.

"We often wondered where evil lived, until the day we realized... it lives in us!"

 

[regwec]

Actually, I would find a "normal person like us" to be a more comforting, less troubling moral assessment of The Joker. I would be more inclined to pity him.

In any case, the Nolan's clearly don't intend that to be the case. Jonathan is quoted all over the place, describing TDK's Joker as an inhuman incarnation of almost supernatural evil.

 

[dark_b]

I guess it was to emphasize the fact that, basically, the Joker is just a normal person like us. And that makes him scarier. If he were permawhite he'd appear alien, and we could say 'oh, he's obviously a freak' and it'd be an easy get-out clause for the audience.

"We often wondered where evil lived, until the day we realized... it lives in us!"

hes got scars and he mentioed them more times. he was the one who was always started with hes damaged face.

 

[ronny]

In any case, the Nolan's clearly don't intend that to be the case. Jonathan is quoted all over the place, describing TDK's Joker as an inhuman incarnation of almost supernatural evil.

But that's nothing new. The comic Joker is the same way. I really don't get the whole notion that the Ledger Joker is somehow a new take on the character. His faithfullness to the comics is so clear that they don't need to overemphasis the supposed superiority of this interpretation.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i was thinking maybe what jonah nolan was getting at was that the joker is the evil and darkness of the human race personified. like he is all the thoughts of anti-order and morality that we have deep inside us. some of things he says really make sense and im sure a lot of people would believe in what he stands for. maybe he is all of our evil and anarchic thoughts brought to life in this supernatural being.

 

[regwec]

But that's nothing new. The comic Joker is the same way. I really don't get the whole notion that the Ledger Joker is somehow a new take on the character. His faithfullness to the comics is so clear that they don't need to overemphasis the supposed superiority of this interpretation.

I didn't mean that this was an original interpretation- just that it excluded the notion of this Joker's raison d'etre being one of realist re interpretation.

 

[hatebox]

Actually, I would find a "normal person like us" to be a more comforting, less troubling moral assessment of The Joker. I would be more inclined to pity him.

There was nothing in TDK to make us pity the Joker, that's for sure. I'm not saying my interpretation is right, but I like the fact that TDK's Joker could be just a normal guy who got incredibly bored with society and decided to have some fun. He certainly doesn't care about money.

 

[DACrowe]

The permawhite wasn't done to make him normal. It was part of Nolan's realism as the vat of chemicals is "sci-fi." Sure we wouldn't mind, but look at all the people still *****ing that Two-Face's scars were too unrealistic. The movie isn't trying to be realistic, but to ground everything. The make-up was just grounding it. Since the only time we see him without make-up is for about .5 seconds it works. Besides, the scars means you can never wipe away the Joker image.

 

[Saint]

look at all the people still *****ing that Two-Face's scars were too unrealistic.

I haven't seen anyone complaining about that.

 

[CaptainClown]

I haven't seen anyone complaining about that.

I have. Many people who didn't like the movie brought that up

 

[Crook]

It's a stupid critique. That's how Two-Face has looked for the better part of his history.

 

[CaptainClown]

It's a stupid critique. That's how Two-Face has looked for the better part of his history.

oh ya I agree, I thought it was spot on. The person I was talking to said it was the most inconstant character of the franchise. He was the most far fetched of all of them. I know I know, well what can you do some people like it others hate it.

 

[MrQuinn]

The permawhite wasn't done to make him normal. It was part of Nolan's realism as the vat of chemicals is "sci-fi." Sure we wouldn't mind, but look at all the people still *****ing that Two-Face's scars were too unrealistic. The movie isn't trying to be realistic, but to ground everything. The make-up was just grounding it. Since the only time we see him without make-up is for about .5 seconds it works. Besides, the scars means you can never wipe away the Joker image.

Excellent point.

 

[Bat-Mite]

More fuel for the fire. From the alleged TDK script (page 76):

Wayne RACES to the window, looks through the SCOPE to see:

EXT. STATE STREET -- CONTINUOUS

THE HONOR GUARD TURN THEIR WEAPONS ON THE MAYOR. One SMILES, flesh-colored makeup over his scars. THE JOKER.

Script located here. Credit goes to Batman Strikes for posting it.

 

[regwec]

Hahah! Aceness!

 

[Eggyman]

Ha! Just when you think all avenues of thought on something have been exhausted.

 

[Crook]

That doesn't mean anything, especially when there are several instances in the script that refer to him wearing clown make-up.

 

[regwec]

There is no doubt that he is wearing makeup, but it is a question of what the makeup is augmenting or concealing. I think it is as I said before; Heath's Joker without makeup would be like one of the milder concepts seen in "The Art of The Dark Knight". He's still very much The Joker, but less clownlike in a traditional sense.

 

[Juggernaut33]

More fuel for the fire. From the alleged TDK script (page 76):Script located here. Credit goes to Batman Strikes for posting it.

If you look at "The art of DK" book you can see some Joker concept pics and early on in the preproduction process, they thought about giving the Joker a white bleach skin. It looks like a disease on the pics...but they finally settled on a makeup. But I guess the draft was written when they were playing with the white bleach idea.

Oh well, if you want to restart the perma-white be my guest...i'm outta here...

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i don't think it looks like hes got bleached skin, it just looks like hes unhealthily pale, like he hasn't been out in the sun-light for years or something.

 

[Crook]

His arms in the hospital scene definitely do look fishy though. There are clear blotches of light skin and white patches all over his arms, most noticeable on his hands. Perhaps that was the Nolans' way of giving a subtle nod to the comic book origin, without drawing too much attention.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

who knows? if the joker is in the third one there could be a twist revealing his skin is not normal anyway.

 

[Crook]

That'd be a revelation, not a twist.

In any case, it doesn't matter at this point. They've cemented a look that portrays a man in clown make-up. You don't need the bleached skin for that.