Originally posted by Alfheim
[B]Hes not going out on a date with you! Hes supposed to be creepy...gezzzz.
In the first movie, the Scarecrow didn't have the typical Scarecrow look. I didn't care, and I was justified when he turned out great. Now, in the second movie, the Joker doesn't have the typical Joker look, and I still don't care; and I fully expect to be justified once again.
Seriously, the comics aren't holy scripture; things change in adaption, and that's as it should be.
Originally posted by Gregory
Seriously, the comics aren't holy scripture; things change in adaption, and that's as it should be.
I guess Nolan has earned his leeway with some but for me I think he is taking a step in the wrong direction with all these extra liberties. That thing looks nothing like the Joker. It'll be interesting to see how the general public accepts him.
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
I guess Nolan has earned his leeway with some but for me I think he is taking a step in the wrong direction with all these extra liberties. That thing looks nothing like the Joker. It'll be interesting to see how the general public accepts him.
So, I mean, would you rather they made Joker the EXACT same way that's already been done before or the film not being made in the first place?
Considering the vast majority of this board LOVES this Joker, the general publics opinion will probably be the same.
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
It's so funny hearing this in a way when people hailed Batman Begins for following the comics and knocked Batman 1989 for not following the holy scripture. (not saying this specific poster said this, just a statement of some general sentiments here)
I find that really funny...
It's like this...
"BR was horrible! Penguin was nothing like in the comics!"
"BB was great! They took "creative liberty" with Scarecrow!"
And...
"B89 was horrible! Batman killed all those goons in Axis Chemicals!"
"BB was great! Bruce just did what he had to at the monastery!"
And finally...
"B89 was horrible! Batman killed Joker!"
"BB was great! Batman didn't have to save Ras!"
You get the picture...
But anyway, back on topic... So, yeah... After seeing Joker in motion, I can confidently say I'm REALLY looking forward to 2008...
Originally posted by Il.Mozalini
So, I mean, would you rather they made Joker the EXACT same way that's already been done before or the film not being made in the first place?Considering the vast majority of this board LOVES this Joker, the general publics opinion will probably be the same.
C'mon there is something to how a character looks. The Joker doesn't have to look exactly like he does in the comics but changes to his appearance shouldn't contradict the nature of his personality and the Joker's personality is a maniac, but an elaborate maniac in a lot of ways. He's obsessed with details and sleek and a smooth talker. The Joker isn't just some wacked out nut job who kills people there is a method to his madness too.
People should really stop trying to act as if you think this interpretation is warped that you wouldn't accept any deviation at all. That isn't the case but any deviation should not take away from the character as a whole and frankly I think this messiness does just like turning the Penguin into a sewer dwelling fish eater took away from his personality as a man who enjoyed the finer things in life.
And this board is no gauge of public opinion. It's a bunch of Batman fanatics for the most part. Many of the people on this board hate Batman 1989 but I don't think the general public as a whole hated that movie. And I'm not saying the general public will hate this Joker I said it is going ot be interesting to see.
Originally posted by Bat Dude
But anyway, back on topic... So, yeah... After seeing Joker in motion, I can confidently say I'm REALLY looking forward to 2008...
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
Gee would you have rather he made Batman look anything remotely like he does in the comics, or turned him into a guy who actually wears bat skins because that's realistic?C'mon there is something to how a character looks. The Joker doesn't have to look exactly like he does in the comics but changes to his appearance shouldn't contradict the nature of his personality and the Joker's personality is a maniac, but an elaborate maniac in a lot of ways. He's obsessed with details and sleek and a smooth talker. The Joker isn't just some wacked out nut job who kills people there is a method to his madness too.
People should really stop trying to act as if you think this interpretation is warped that you wouldn't accept any deviation at all. That isn't the case but any deviation should not take away from the character as a whole and frankly I think this messiness does just like turning the Penguin into a sewer dwelling fish eater took away from his personality as a man who enjoyed the finer things in life.
And this board is no gauge of public opinion. It's a bunch of Batman fanatics for the most part. Many of the people on this board hate Batman 1989 but I don't think the general public as a whole hated that movie. And I'm not saying the general public will hate this Joker I said it is going ot be interesting to see.
Well the general public won't care, especially on how loyal to the comic any characters are. The only people that will care are batman fanatics, and as I've previously stated, most love it.
Originally posted by Il.Mozalini
Well the general public won't care, especially on how loyal to the comic any characters are. The only people that will care are batman fanatics, and as I've previously stated, most love it.
Oh FFS...
There are people who just can't get past what they experienced in the comic books. Then there are people who can't get past the last Batman series of films.
Then there are those people who are a little more relaxed who say..."Gee, BATMAN BEGINS and THE DARK KNIGHT seem to feel like they are really true to the spirit of the characters and stories I've loved all my life."
I'm still going to see the movies. I saw Batman Forever and Batman and Robin....Lord God I saw them...
But I mean I still think people's comments on the looks of the Joker negative and positive are valid. I mean this is the same fanbase that knocked Schumacher for putting nipples on the Batsuit I don't think it's wrong to complain that the Joker looks like a toy clown that someone microwaved.
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
I know he isn't going out on a date with me he needs to make a date with a comb and a brush. The Joker is sleek, and well put together his meticulousness is APART of his madness.
I actually dont think you can prove that...in the no mans land series he may not have been scruffy but he wasnt that bothered about living in scuffy surroundings.
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
To me making him sloppy and disgusting loses part of the essence of the character. The Joker is obsessed with detail even in his insanity that's why a lot of his schemes are so elaborate.
Again dont think you can prove that. Anyway basically your saying that The Joker basically has to look like the comic book version any alterations is leaving the essence. Hell Gordon has brown hair lets complain about that.
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
That thing looks nothing like the Joker.
What is Heath Ledger playing the Joker??? Damn I thought he was playing 2face.... 😕
Originally posted by Alfheim
[B]Again dont think you can prove that. Anyway basically your saying that The Joker basically has to look like the comic book version any alterations is leaving the essence. Hell Gordon has brown hair lets complain about that.
And Gordon having brown hair changes nothing about who he is or doesn't suggest anything different.
The Joker's look is APART of who he is. If it wasn't Nolan wouldn't have spent so much time trying to reimagine it so he could make a new mark on the Joker.
And furthermore as I said if looks aren't important why was everyone whining about Batman's nipples and codpieces in the Batman movies by Schumacher?
"Costume designer Linda Hemming described the Joker's look as being based around his personality, in which "he doesn't care about himself at all." She avoided his design being vagrant, but nonetheless it is "scruffier, grungier and therefore when you see him move, he's slightly twitchier or edgy."[8] The clown make-up is minimal; his mask is made up of three pieces of stamped silicone, described by Heath Ledger as a "new technology" which is much quicker to apply than regular prosthetics. Ledger felt that he was not wearing any make-up at all.[17] It only took an hour to apply to Ledger on each day of shooting. In the film, the Joker is merely exaggerating his facial scarring; he never removes his make-up. During the course of the film it worsens, resembling an infection.[8]"
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
Is this not the same argument people made complaining about how the Penguin looked in Returns? "That's not the penguin!" etc etc etc.And Gordon having brown hair changes nothing about who he is or doesn't suggest anything different.
The Joker's look is APART of who he is. If it wasn't Nolan wouldn't have spent so much time trying to reimagine it so he could make a new mark on the Joker.
Exactly Gordon not having white hair is the same as The Joker looking scruffy it doesnt take anything away from the character, in fact it reinforces his character and you missed the point.
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
And furthermore as I said if looks aren't important why was everyone whining about Batman's nipples and codpieces in the Batman movies by Schumacher?
Because it made Batman look camp. It makes Batman look like an overtly sexual character. Is Batman camp? Is Batman an overtly sexullay character.....no. Is The Joker a pyscho...yes....and his appearance reflects his character. Schumachers portryal did not reflect Batmans characters. Hell it could be argued that Burtons Penguin doesnt reflect Penguins characters because Penguin isnt a psyhco in the comics he is just a selfish business man.
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
The Joker's surroundings versus how he keeps his appearance are two entirely different things.
Oh ok then ive seen him get ruffed in the comicbooks and not making any fuss about his appearance, so you're wrong. You might as well say 2face os meticulous about his appearance..........no thats just the way he looks.
Basically your only point is that you dont like his appearance and thats that.