Here’s what he’s going to look like in the next film. I have to say that I like it. I loved Batman Begins, and it’s nice to see that they’re staying with the gritty nature of the previous film for this one.
I saw the picture before and I’m withholding judgment for the time being. This is one of those things that could go either way on film.
I love that Aaron Eckhart will be the next Harvey Dent! He’s great.
Agreed. They’re obviously going the warped and frightening route. I could see it working to good effect, even if it’s a departure from the expected. My only concern is whether Ledger can convincingly pull off the character … I’m not so sure, based on the roles I’ve seen him in.
Wow, Ledger looks awful. I gather he won’t be wearing the purple tuxedo or anything. Rather, he’ll sit half-naked in a jungle hovel, waiting for Martin Sheen to come chop his head off, or something.
I’m of the opinion that the Joker should be played by someone who would be scary even without the makeup. Which is why I think Jack Nicholson nailed it in Tim Burton’s Batman. Willem Dafoe would have been my choice, but since he already played the Green Goblin, it wouldn’t really be right.
After seeing him in “Brokeback Mountain” (before which I didn’t take him seriously as anything more than a pretty face), I’m cautiously optimistic that he can pull off something so different. I’m more concerned about the director - I think Heath can do anything the director asks of him.
That’s an…interesting look.
I think Nicholson was AWFUL, but I also hated Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne… in fact, the animated Mask of the Phantasm was the only movie to get Batman right until Batman Begins came along. Nicholson played himself, as he so often does – a somewhat-lecherous, kinda-unknowable tough guy. The Joker, on the other hand, should be full of manic energy, occasionally charming in the sense of a a cult leader who brainwashes and seduces his followers, but chaotic and ready to snap at any moment.
He should be portrayed as effeminate, tall and lanky in a purple zoot suit, to make people wonder if he’s straight, gay, completely asexual, or willing to screw anything, provided he can cut a hole in it first. Keep in mind how he may or may not have raped Barbara Gordon in The Killing Joke, and what he did to Commissioner Gordon when he kidnapped him… and of course his bizarre, abusive relationship with Harley Quinn over the years. That’s what makes him Batman’s most long-standing foe. Batman can beat anyone with prep time, but it’s hard to prep against someone who continually defies logic and reason. He is colorful contrasted against Batman’s outer darkness, but in truth, they’re both dark and twisted, just wearing two different masks.
For years, David Bowie was my top choice to play the Joker after years of portraying pale, androgynous, sexually-ambiguous, spacy characters. He isn’t a bad actor either, but he’s too old now, so I was hoping Nolan would go with well-known weirdo Crispin Glover. Then there’s Mark Hamill, also a bit old now, but he voiced a perfect Joker on Batman: The Animated Series, and it would have been a great comeback role for him in the movie. So far, I have the utmost faith in Nolan, so I’m sure he saw something dark and twisted in Heath Ledger that we haven’t seen yet.
OK. I like it, I think. A more natural look, like someone whose face actually has been mutilated with acid. It looks more realistic than the pancake job on Jack Nicholson and Cesar Romero. In Romero’s case, the heavy makeup was to hide his mustache, which he refused to shave off.
BBVL, while I loved Nicholson’s portrayal of the Joker, I think your conception of him as a tall, skinny, androgynous David Bowie figure is also a good one. But I think Ledger doesn’t fit the bill for that kind of character either. I’ve always thought of Heath Ledger as a pretty unambiguously masculine actor.
The thing with that is that you lose the strength of the evil clown look by having him be that mutilated. Ledger isn’t even smiling in that picture and I feel that a solid Joker portrayal should have him be disturbingly cheerful.
In the end it’s going to come down to the performance not the make-up and an alternative take on the character isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Maybe when a trailer hits we’ll get a bit more of a feeling for where they’re going with this.
Looks pretty horrible. Call me old-fashioned, but shouldn’t the Joker usually be, oh, hell, I don’t know… smiling? Seeing as how he’s the “Joker,” and all, I mean.
But no, I see it now; the Joker should definitely be portrayed as a gloomy, unsmiling man, devoid of color and animation, just like that powdery-skinned mastermind guy from the Saw films. That’s where this is really coming from, isn’t it? I bet it is. The filmmakers remembered that little doll figure from those movies and went, “There’s our inspiration! This’ll be our conceptual jumping-off point for the character!”
And since when is “deep facial scarring” the defining characteristic of the Joker? Yeah, that’s a brilliant choice, especially since no other Batman villains have massive facial deformities as a part of their gimmick. I presume this is some half-assed attempt to link the film back to the Tim Burton version, where Jack Nicholson gets shot in the face and spends the rest of the film as a Cracked magazine caricature of himself. News flash, guys: that only has a chance of working if the actor in question is* Jack Nicholson.* Nobody includes a Heath Ledger impression in their celebrity impersonation stand-up routine.
Who the hell is Heath Ledger anyway? Let’s see… IMDb describes him as “hunky…” Oh, well that’s all right then. He’s the Hunky Joker! Perfect. That explains the emphasis on his massively beefy lips in that Joker image. “Hi there! I’m Brad Pitt, starring in my one-man stage show: Brando!”
Why am I certain that Frank Miller is somehow responsible for this?
Well, since he looks like a zombie now, does that mean Batman will finally shoot him in the head?
(Or maybe Katie Holmes will just give another lecture about how Mister J isn’t really evil because he’s so poor. :rolleyes: )
Meh. :mad:
Crime is a disease. Here’s The Cure. Seriously, since when was the Joker a Slipknot fan?
She isn’t going to be in this one. I guess Tom holds the reigns tight.
Katie brought a lot of bad publicity to Batman Begins (it came out during the height of the TomKat madness), plus she was the weak link in a stellar cast. WB and Nolan decided to replace her with the talented and adorable Maggie Gyllenhaal, but I’m not sure if Maggie will be playing the same character (Rachel Dawes) or just a new love interest.
I definitely don’t think the Joker needs to smile all the time. One thing that makes clowns so unnerving and scary for so many people is that they could be sad, or angry, yet still have the grotesque red greasepaint smile on their faces, no matter how they are really thinking and feeling.
I just had a strange thought about the new makeup: perhaps this could merely be the first phase of Joker’s transformation. Maybe the look may evolve more in the film (or in future films if he makes a return?) as he slips further and further into insanity. The scarring could eventually be dressed up surgically, or via more stylized makeup, into a more sinister character-defining smile as the Joker becomes a greater menace.
The villains in the first film didn’t really take on a final look until Bruce finally learned to come to terms with his fears, so their appearance was never really static throughout. Maybe the same could apply here and this is only a “first step” for the Joker’s look? Just a thought.
The scarring works for me, since I think they’re obviously going for a Conrad Veidt Joker, which is an interesting approach.
[The Critic]It stinks![/The Critic].