I really don’t care that Jared Leto’s Joker looks more like a Juggalo than an insane criminal mastermind. I am trying very hard to resist the temptation to make negative comparisons to Heath Ledger’s interpretation of the character. I don’t even care that Leto looks more like a fan of the Joker—who got way too carried away at the tattoo shop—than like the actual Joker.
© DC Comics / Warner Bros., via Twitter / @DavidAyerMovies
Any time I think a modern-day portrayal of the Joker is in any way ridiculous or unworthy of the character, I just remember that Cesar Romero’s Joker was once the only live-action screen portrayal of the Joker in existence.
Where Leto’s Joker loses me, though, and goes from over-the-top comic book villain to ridiculous bullshit, is the “Damaged” tattoo on his forehead. Were they worried that someone might look at that picture and not understand that this person has a troubled past?
Not every movie villain has to be like Anthony Hopkins’ Hannibal Lecter, perhaps the cinematic epitome of “show, don’t tell.” It’s perfectly okay for a comic book supervillain to be cartoonish on the screen. If your villain, however, feels the need to label himself—and I do mean that literally—as being insane, then something probably went wrong somewhere in the development process.
As this remark from Twitter suggests, the forehead tattoo also suggests that something other than sheer criminality may have motivated this Joker (h/t Tauriq Moosa):
See also this tweet:
@tauriqmoosa think of all the time they save on storytelling by just tattooing "damaged" on his forehead though.
— Andy Prime (@ImACultHero) April 25, 2015
