The Dark Knight Will the Joker eveh be the same?

[The Shredder]

uh, tim burtons penguin was a savage sewer dwelling dolt. in the comics, he's an upper class well spoken intellectual gentleman.

Yeah, visually the only holdover from the Burton design we every once in awhile see in the comics is the webbed hands, and sometimes more grotesque nose. But that's about it.

 

[Mr. Socko]

And the fact that Joker's personality in this film is going to be akin to many comics, Batman #1, Killing Joke, Arkham Asylum, etc. So what exactly is there from TDK Joker to incorporate into the comics that would make it stand out as "the movie influenced this change"? Only thing I can think of is a carved smile, and I sure as hell don't want that in the comics.

I don't read comic books so I could care less.

Sad thing is, you don't know how much you're missing, buddy. Batman comics are the best there is.

 

[Trooper]

didnt some interpretations of the joker resemble very close to jack nicholson?

 

[Mr. Socko]

didnt some interpretations of the joker resemble very close to jack nicholson?

More like Jack Nicholson's interpretation resembled the Joker of the comics. The perma-smile was most influenced from Dick Sprang's version I believe.

 

[The Shredder]

didnt some interpretations of the joker resemble very close to jack nicholson?

Sometimes, but not very often. Though I felt The Joker very much resembled Jack's Joker in the Gotham Central "Soft Targets" arc.

 

[The Redux 714]

Of course it matters. A black guy with no make up Joker is no Joker no matter how crazy he is.

You sir just something to such an extreme even comic writers couldn't have come up with it...and did but tell me how big a moron you are for saying it.

What I'm saying is wether or not The Joker looks like he does in...oh say The Killing Joker versus The Dark Knight movie, his personailty should be the main focal point...unless of course you wanna go back to booty shaking to Prince of the 80's and the harmless trickster/theif of the 60's.

 

[gwynplaine]

From now on the Joker will look like the penguin in Batman returns.

 

[nickyg641]

Does it really matter what he looks like?

Well, yes.

he Joker has gone through so many different "looks" no one can keep up with him. Everyone that draws or portrays him does it differently. Why? Because the Joker is always doing something different.

No, not really. He's pretty much always looked just about the same.

It shouldn't matter if the Joker's look is different, just as long as he keeps his personality.

Read my signature. You fall into the category of one of those fans.

 

[360sculptguy]

Short answer is no, he wont ever be the same again. The cut smile will always be a more acceptable possibility now. But the question is flawed because it assumes the character was static to begin with. It assumes he had a "one and only" story. It assumes that public tastes are static and a specific visual or storyline will always be what appeals to the masses. In a way it also assumes that the creators and artists place more importance with the status quo than they do with reinvention, keeping the character fresh, or pulling in new readers. I just don't think any of that is true. Comic Joker has no conventional character arc, the public has embraced increasingly graphic comics in the last 40 years, new generations of fans want to have stories they can call their own, artists always want to make their mark, and "DC" will always be looking for what sells. So that being said, this Joker is as much a part of the lexicon as any Joker. And if in 50 years DC produces an online animated series about cut smile Joker with a green mowhawk and ten facial piercings, raping 8 year olds and cannibalizing the elderly in photorealism, that will be part of the lexicon as well. It's all the legit creation of the author, "DC". If they put their stamp on it, claim it, and promote it, it just "is".

All that being said, I would also point out that the comics don't really need the cut smile. The comics can and do just exaggerate the human anatomy to make the absurd smile possible. The scarred smile of the film nods to the absurdity of the comic's imagery without tons of digital effects or dominant prosthetics. Now, the comics might embrace the cut smile purely for characterization value. Showing a more visceral reminder of his brutality and traumatized persona. Honestly, with the draw of progressively more violent comics, I think the cut smile could have become more prominent in the series regardless of the film.

 

[Mr. Socko]

You sir just something to such an extreme even comic writers couldn't have come up with it...and did but tell me how big a moron you are for saying it.

What I'm saying is wether or not The Joker looks like he does in...oh say The Killing Joker versus The Dark Knight movie, his personailty should be the main focal point...unless of course you wanna go back to booty shaking to Prince of the 80's and the harmless trickster/theif of the 60's.

Booty shaking to Prince was great, son.

Joker in the comics can exaggerate his natural mouth into a huge very large grin. That is not possible in real life nor on screen, hence the entire reason for the perma-smile in '89 and the cut smile in '08.

 

[thelaughingfish]

In Batman #633 (an absolutely terrible issue) it was revealed that the Joker now has a surgically-"enhanced" permanent smile.

This apparently was not the case in the Joker's next appearance (Countdown #50), but I'm not quite sure if (or when) that series takes place within normal DC continuity...

 

[Juanigi]

I still don't know where you guys are getting this carved cut slashed smile stuff from

what part of this welted burn-looking scar looks like a cut?

I could understand painted smile, bumpy smile, extended smile, I could even understand bullet-hole smile, but there's nothing there that looks like a chelsea grin

even the frontal shot from ibelieveinharveydenttoo looked, at best, like a raised surface wound, not a deep permanent curve through his cheek

 

[BubbaGump]

Sometimes, but not very often. Though I felt The Joker very much resembled Jack's Joker in the Gotham Central "Soft Targets" arc.

Hmm. I didn't see the resemblance.

I loved Soft Targets though. :heart:

 

[gwynplaine]

I still don't know where you guys are getting this carved cut slashed smile stuff from

what part of this welted burn-looking scar looks like a cut?

I could understand painted smile, bumpy smile, extended smile, I could even understand bullet-hole smile, but there's nothing there that looks like a chelsea grin

even the frontal shot from ibelieveinharveydenttoo looked, at best, like a raised surface wound, not a deep permanent curve through his cheek

This is either photoshopped or healing. I'm sure it will burst open at some point revealing the ghastly (and possibly bloody) grin.

 

[Juanigi]

then he would be unable to laugh, much less speak

 

[CaptainClown]

Ya, he's a White Tony Sinclair.

haha

 

[gwynplaine]

then he would be unable to laugh, much less speak

You are probably right, I just think we don't know much yet.

 

[Crook]

I still don't know where you guys are getting this carved cut slashed smile stuff from

what part of this welted burn-looking scar looks like a cut?

That's because the cut is on the other side.

The side shown on this pic, resembles the left side of Heath's face on the IBIHDT site.

 

[Juanigi]

I agree that it's probably the other side, but even then, the first photo had a big blister or hole that's conspicuously smoother here

 

[Axtech]

That's because the cut is on the other side.

The side shown on this pic, resembles the left side of Heath's face on the IBIHDT site.

your left, Heath's right, you mean?

 

[Crook]

I agree that it's probably the other side, but even then, the first photo had a big blister or hole that's conspicuously smoother here

True, but the difference there is much smaller compared to the very obvious gashing scar in the first pic.

your left, Heath's right, you mean?

Nope. I presume one of the two pictures is flipped.

 

[Axtech]

True, but the difference there is much smaller compared to the very obvious gashing scar in the first pic.


Nope. I presume one of the two pictures is flipped.

Look at the way his right side in both pictures curls upwards more than the left... I think they're the same. A little less pronounced on the newer pic, though.

 

[Crook]

To be fair we haven't seen the other side of that knife pic.

 

[Axtech]

yeah, I know what you mean. but it looks to me like only one side of the first Joker pic is curled up that way.

 

[Crook]

Well the chicago vids, albeit very far away, showed that both sides do curl up.