Heath Ledgers Joker

[BurtonBatman]

BurtonBatman, you can pick up Laughing Fish/Sign of the Joker in the collection called Batman: Strange Apparitions.  According to Englehart, his characters from those stories- Rupert Thorne and Silver St. Cloud-eventually became Carl Grissom and Vicki Vale (of course, Vale was a comic book character for awhile, but I think the love subplot in Burton's film is closer to Englehart's story of the Silver-Bruce relationship than any of the Vicki Vale stories I've read in the comics).

In terms of elements that Kane had approved of- the film, in a way, kind of reflects the creative choices he didn't get to do in the comics.  Aesthetically, Batman's suit in the comics was always supposed to be black (according to Bob Ringwood in talking to Kane) and Vicki Vale was supposed to be blonde (according to the documentary on the Gotham Knight DVD- she was based off Marilyn Monroe). 
As for the Joker, he was originally supposed to die in Batman #1 in a scene somewhat like the Burton film in which he was determined to get the last laugh and died with a smile on his face.  At the last minute, though, they decided to keep the character and added a panel with a doctor saying he survived.

Ah, the elusive "Strange Apparitions."  I've been looking for that one, now I have extra motivation.  I think it has been reprinted, but it seems to be hard to find at bookstores, even Amazon draws a blank.  Have any suggestions as to where I might find it?

On your other points, I knew about the printing issues (black outlined in blue) and that the Joker was brought back by Kane's publisher, but the deal about Kane saying that had he created the Joker in 1939 he would have had him kill the Waynes is amazing.  Wow, it REALLY seems that for Bob Kane, B89 was HIS Batman, at least the one he had always invisioned, especially since he was finally free from the constraints placed on him early on.  I have a new, and even higher appreciation of B89 (if that was possible)with this new information.  Thanks again BatmAngelus, you are a treasure trove of Bat-knowledge .

[Paul (ral)]

Ah, the elusive "Strange Apparitions."  I've been looking for that one, now I have extra motivation.  I think it has been reprinted, but it seems to be hard to find at bookstores, even Amazon draws a blank.  Have any suggestions as to where I might find it?

http://www.amazon.com/Batman-Strange-Apparitions-Steve-Englehart/dp/1563895005

[BatmAngelus]

Wow, it REALLY seems that for Bob Kane, B89 was HIS Batman, at least the one he had always invisioned, especially since he was finally free from the constraints placed on him early on.  I have a new, and even higher appreciation of B89 (if that was possible)with this new information.  Thanks again BatmAngelus, you are a treasure trove of Bat-knowledge .

Thanks for the compliment, my friend.  According to the documentary on Bob Kane on the Gotham Knight DVD, Kane was very happy with how B89 captured his character.   

One thing I think I definitely prefer from Burton's Joker over Nolan's (and I think I can say it's fair to judge this through photos & trailers, without seeing the movie) is the look.  To me, the sloppy, ugly, and disfigured makeup comes across as trying to hard to make him look scary when, really, I think the actor's facial expressions should carry the frightening aspect. 
I always thought Joker looked scary not because of what was on his face, but what he was doing with his face.  When looking at most illustrations of Joker in the comics, it's those wide eyes and smile that frighten you.  It's just a lot more interesting to me when there's a bit of a contrast and he looks like a neat clownish showman on the outside, but underneath- from what you see in the eyes and smile- he is a lunatic and a monster.

What do you guys think?

[BurtonBatman]

Ah, the elusive "Strange Apparitions."  I've been looking for that one, now I have extra motivation.  I think it has been reprinted, but it seems to be hard to find at bookstores, even Amazon draws a blank.  Have any suggestions as to where I might find it?

http://www.amazon.com/Batman-Strange-Apparitions-Steve-Englehart/dp/1563895005

Thanks raleagh 

[BurtonBatman]

One thing I think I definitely prefer from Burton's Joker over Nolan's (and I think I can say it's fair to judge this through photos & trailers, without seeing the movie) is the look.  To me, the sloppy, ugly, and disfigured makeup comes across as trying to hard to make him look scary when, really, I think the actor's facial expressions should carry the frightening aspect. 
I always thought Joker looked scary not because of what was on his face, but what he was doing with his face.  When looking at most illustrations of Joker in the comics, it's those wide eyes and smile that frighten you.  It's just a lot more interesting to me when there's a bit of a contrast and he looks like a neat clownish showman on the outside, but underneath- from what you see in the eyes and smile- he is a lunatic and a monster.

What do you guys think?

I don't know what to think about the look of Ledger's Joker either.  Without me  knowing what Nolan had intended for sure, I have to assume is that he wanted to differentiate his Joker from those who came before, and the disheveled look is apart of that.  On its face though, I also prefer the traditional look of the Joker.

When I was rereading Batman#1, one frame stuck out to me that goes along with what you are saying.  Its in the first appearance, where the Joker says something to the effect that if the police mess with him they will be dealt from the bottom of the deck.  His mouth was a huge grin, but the eyes conveyed a different story altogether, something dangerous and sinister.   

[Batman]

Heath Ledger's Joker looks like a clown painting that was hit by turpentine.

I for one like the look. Has anyone seen the scene in which he crashed the party?
Good stuff! Really looking forward to the Joker scenes.

[Paul (ral)]

Yeah, there are some nice little quirky things in that.

[Joker81]

[/quote]

One thing I think I definitely prefer from Burton's Joker over Nolan's (and I think I can say it's fair to judge this through photos & trailers, without seeing the movie) is the look.  To me, the sloppy, ugly, and disfigured makeup comes across as trying to hard to make him look scary when, really, I think the actor's facial expressions should carry the frightening aspect. 
I always thought Joker looked scary not because of what was on his face, but what he was doing with his face.  When looking at most illustrations of Joker in the comics, it's those wide eyes and smile that frighten you.  It's just a lot more interesting to me when there's a bit of a contrast and he looks like a neat clownish showman on the outside, but underneath- from what you see in the eyes and smile- he is a lunatic and a monster.

What do you guys think?


[/quote]

Yeah, I dont care what anyone says, to me the Joker should have a permanant smile. I appreciate the different direction the new film has took, what would be the worst is if they tried to immatate Nicholsons.

But what Nolan and crew have done is look at a picture of Jack as the Joker and just dont everthing opposite.
For instance, Jacks Jokers was clean and had pride in his appearance.
Ledgers is scruffy and dirty.
Jack had a perfect smile
Ledgers is krucked
Jacks Hair was neat and tidy
Ledgers is long and scruffy
Jack was bleached white- he wore fleah coloured make-up to conseal who he was (Like the comics)
Ledger's not bleached white, he wears make-up for the appearance of the Joker.
Jack had the tailcoat
Ledger has the long coat
Jack had the Bib Waistcoat
Ledger has the Traditional Waistcoat (closer to the comics tho)
Jacks trousers were palid (probably because hes a golfer in real life, but they work with his suit)
Ledgers Pinstripped (again like the comic)
Jacks Gloves velvet
Ledgers Leather.

Now I'm not knocking the look of the new Joker, I'm looking forward to this as much as anyone! But to me he is the crow in colour.

This is funny lol when I showed my dad a picture of Ledgers Joker he thought it was Michael Keaton! He thought he looked like Beetlejuice. Ironic huh?

[greggbray]

I'm sure Ledger's performance is going to be terriffic! I think he's a marvelous actor, and he's obviously playing a much different Joker than Jack Nicholson (not elevating one aobut the other--haven't seen TDK and I love B89). 

I'm not wild about the appearance.  Joker should be permawhite.  I have a hard time divorcing myself from a Joker who can not help but BE the Joker, as opposed to a man dressing up in make-up--in other words, *chosing* to be The Joker.

Still, I have hopes for a great Batflick this week. 

[Joker81]

Thats a great point greggbray, to me the Joker doesnt want to be the Joker, he cant help want hes been turned into, and if haven a choice would not be the Joker.

I think thats why the Jokers character taunts Batman so much, he see's Batman's path as a choice. He cant understand why a man would want to dress up like a bat and fight crime. Bruce Wayne would despute the fact of having a choice of course- since he knows the the truth of why he is Batman.

Your rite in what you are saying, about a man putting on clown makeup to do his evil deeds.