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

[alexdunn]

I think that the JoKer put flesh colored makeup all over his body and neck and stuff. Also he put it on assorted parts of his face to make it look like makeup. He also put brown dye in his hair. When he was in the interogation room he put on more flesh colored makeup because he's crazy.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I think that the JoKer put flesh colored makeup all over his body and neck and stuff. Also he put it on assorted parts of his face to make it look like makeup. He also put brown dye in his hair. When he was in the interogation room he put on more flesh colored makeup because he's crazy.

lol are you serious? how and why would he put make-up on in the interrogation room?

 

[Danielson]

See, here is why I don't get the complaints. The comic book Joker looks like that because it's easier to draw. That's it, it's simply easier artistically to draw him that way. In a movie, a perma-white joker would look silly. I thought that Nicholson looked silly, he'd look especially silly in Nolan's universe. Instead of saying "well I hate this because that's my opinion and damnit I'm not gonna change" why don't people think "I wonder why they did it this way" and then you learn to appreciate the reasons.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

danielson whos quote is that in your sig?

 

[deathfromabove]

Funny to think that both the Joker and Batman apply black make-up around their eyes to go to war with each other (warpaint indeed).
Man, I love this film.

more sychronicity.

Looking at the image of the "paintless" Joker again, it seems to me that if that face was underneath greenish hair, then most people would have accepted the design as a toned-down version of the permawhite Joker.

agreed.

Yes, I am just glad that his face was clearly "off" in some way. It allowed for any explanation the viewer desired.

yeah im glad we never got a "normal faced" joker and it was never addressed completely.

You seem to be seeing a much paler makeup-less Joker than I am. He really doesn't look that pale...just sort of unhealthy.

he looked pretty pale to me. not supernaturally pale but...

 

[Saint]

See, here is why I don't get the complaints. The comic book Joker looks like that because it's easier to draw.

No.

 

[Judson Caspian]

The comic book Joker looks like that because it's easier to draw.

Because he's all white? That explains why they drew his suit in different colours...

 

[dark_b]

See, here is why I don't get the complaints. The comic book Joker looks like that because it's easier to draw. That's it, it's simply easier artistically to draw him that way. In a movie, a perma-white joker would look silly. I thought that Nicholson looked silly, he'd look especially silly in Nolan's universe. Instead of saying "well I hate this because that's my opinion and damnit I'm not gonna change" why don't people think "I wonder why they did it this way" and then you learn to appreciate the reasons.

its easier to draw a white face? thats why joker has white skin?

 

[batlovescatDC]

i personally love everything about the joker in tdk..... especially the makeup.

 

[CaptainClown]

its easier to draw a white face? thats why joker has white skin?

Ya I don't know

 

[Dirt Like Me]

The comic book Joker looks like that because it's easier to draw. That's it, it's simply easier artistically to draw him that way.

I also heard that this is the same reason that Robin was drawn without pants. It's easier to draw bare legs than it is to draw pants.

 

[regwec]

No.

Yes: no.

 

[CaptainClown]

oh well

 

[CaptainClown]

You state an opinion but don't give reasons why. Why did him wearing make up make him better? The manner you said it is a slap to people who want an all white. Also it comes across as something a Nolanite would say.

 

[CaptainClown]

You do have to explain yourself when you declare something is better and far superior. It is no longer really an opinion when you paint things in black and white then you are depicting it as fact.

 

[ronny]

Chemicals wouldn't give you a placed smile.

Burton wasn't suggesting that. The moronic, inaccurate permanent smile was a result of a very poor plastic surgeon.

 

[CaptainClown]

I never said make-up was far superior, I simply said that Ledger's Joker looked better than Nicholson's because they made Nicholson's Joker have a fun that looked too rubbery. Plus, the new Joker having a glasglow smile in place of a set smile from chemicals is much more realistic and better. Chemicals wouldn't give you a placed smile.

1.

I was really glad he wasn't permawhite, it made him better.

That is what you said, implying make-up was better

2. I don't get what you are saying when you say have a fun that looked too rubbery

3. It wasn't just chemicals that gave him a fixed smile, it was a stray bullet mixed with botch plastic surgery that gave him the smile.

I really don't care what you liked but it was the manner in how you said it that erked me.

 

[CaptainClown]

it is a discussion board, if you post in here you are open to comments so no I won't drop it because that is what you do here. If you didn't care why respond to me?

 

[CaptainClown]

Then I still want to know why you felt it was better

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i dont remember seeing him apply his make-up.

 

[Crook]

I disagree, both would be easy to draw, but having him apply make-up is more realistic. An accidental chemical bath wouldn't give you bleached skin. Nolan is going for a more realistic Batman universe whereas Burton focused on a much more fantastical universe. I'd still love to see Burton attempt more Batman movies, but it's probably too late.

Nolan could have also just as easily toned down Two-Face's scars in the name of realism, yet we saw otherwise. Let's just drop this realism nonsense because clearly it wasn't strictly adhered to nearly as much as fans would claim.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i dont think the idea that in this film the joker wears makeup just because its realistic holds any ground. theres much more to it than that, i don't think when the nolans were writing it they thought " oh well he will have to wear make-up because thats the only realistic way to go". i think the make-up is a very important part of this joker, i feel the make up is his real face and without make-up is his mask.
they could of realistically portrayed him as "permawhite" but just having him a unhealthy pale complexion.

 

[Two-Face=Badass]

Adding my voice to the conversation. To me, I'm fine with people loving the makeup (I personally felt it was a slight letdown, but other than that Heath's Joker was darn good), and I'm fine with people hating it. As I just said, I like bleached more because it is more classic, faithful and fits with a "dapper" Joker which is how he should and pretty much was done in TDK. What I'm not fine with though, is people saying makeup is far superior to bleached. Now that's just a slap in the face to 70 years of comic history whether or not you read it, its plain silly to think a movie could do better than the amassed amount of so much creative talent. I loved TDK as one of my favourite movies, but the comic Joker will always beat Heath's for me, because he defies realism as the wild card he is

 

[Bathead]

Burton wasn't suggesting that. The moronic, inaccurate permanent smile was a result of a very poor plastic surgeon.

Not true. It was because he got shot thru the cheeks and the bullet severed the nerves (remember the surgeon saying exactly that?) controlling the muscles that make you smile, causing a permanent grin, which can actually happen in reality. That's not something Burton made up out of thin air.

 

[p4poetic]

^Precisely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Laughs

In 1940, comic book artist Bob Kane and writer Bill Finger used Gwynplaine's lanky physique and grotesque grin as the visual inspiration for the Joker, Batman's archenemy. There the similarity ends, however; Gwynplaine is an embittered hero, while the Joker is a psychopathic criminal.
In the 1970s, Bob Kane acknowledged the inspiration for the Joker, and it was later explicitly referenced in the graphic novel, Batman: The Man Who Laughs. Comic book artist Brian Bolland said that watching The Man Who Laughs was one of his inspirations for drawing the graphic novel Batman: The Killing Joke (1988). In the episode "Wild Cards" of the Justice League animated series (2003), The Joker infiltrated a TV station by using the alias "Gwynplaine Entertainment."

http://www.darkromance.com/dr-bod/dr-bod-vol_1_02/dr-bod-020718-sardonicus-joker.html

The Lasting Influence of The Man Who Laughs
The most well known of many creative references in popular culture to Victor Hugo's The Man Who Laughs is found in Batman's nemesis The Joker.

The character's co-creator, Bob Kane, described in a 1970 interview how a photo of Conrad Veidt's Gwynplaine was an early influence on The Joker's appearance.

Like Gwynplaine, The Joker is also the victim of a horrid disfigurement, though the comic book character's face is changed by an accident in which he is immersed in a vat of chemicals, bleaching his skin and discoloring his hair. Unlike Gwynplaine, who is a truly heartbreaking victim with an origin born of a stark, historical reality that leaves him somwhat reclusive, The Joker is a sociopathic serial-killer with a psychotic sense of morbid showmanship.

James Ellroy also invoked the image of Gwynplaine in his novel The Black Dahlia as a clue to revealing the motive behind one of the victim's many grotesque wounds.

A gothic horror tale entitled 'Sardonicus' appeared in a 1961 edition of Playboy and was turned into a low-budget horror film by William Castle, the director of The Tingler, The House on Haunted Hill and 13 Ghosts. Titled Mr. Sardonicus, the film told the story of a man who is cursed with 'risus sardonicus,' a locked spasm of the facial muscles, upon the sight of his father's corpse during a moonlit graverobbing.

I found this gruesome and disturbing (note: DON'T highlight if you don't think you'd want to know).

A Glasgow smile (also known as a Chelsea grin or Chelsea smile) is a nickname for the malicious practice of cutting a victim's face from the edges of the mouth to the ears, often using a credit card to hold the mouth open in modern times: the cut - or its scars - form an "extension" of what resembles a smile.[BLACKOUT] Sometimes to further hurt or even kill the victim, he or she would then be stabbed or kicked, most notably in the stomach (or in case of kicking, the groin), so that the face would be ripped apart when the victim screamed.[/BLACKOUT]The practice originated in the Scottish city of Glasgow, which gave it its name. It also became popular in Chelsea, London (where it is known as a "Chelsea grin") and other areas of Britain, for gangs hoping to leave a message to rival gang members. If cut deep enough, the victim can likely bleed to death.[1]

[BLACKOUT]She had everything a leading scarlet would have. Plump lips, milky skin, and striking eyes made Elizabeth Short the ideal beauty. Born in Hyde Park, MA on July 29, 1924, Elizabeth had dreams of becoming a leading lady. After graduating high school she moved to Hollywood with dreams of stardom. Sadly, the only stardom Elizabeth would ever get came after her murder on January 15, 1947. On that day a mother pushing her child in a stroller caught sight of a bloodless corpse chopped in two and completely drained of blood. Her mouth was slashed in the corners of her mouth up to her ears creating a demented smile. Her hair was clean, shampooed, and wet. A portion of her leg was cut off and shoved up into her genitals. Police knew from the minute they saw her they were seeing one of the most horrific murders to have ever hit mankind. Her nickname of Black Dahlia was based on the movie The Blue Dahlia. Hundreds of people were considered suspects. Since then 60 people have confessed to her murder, but no one has been charged. Many people believe that Short's murder was committed by someone who had intense medical knowledge and a love for surrealism.[/BLACKOUT]

Elizabeth Short

http://poetry.rotten.com/black-dahlia/

Dear Lord.