Recently, David Ayer released the first official image of the Joker for the new Suicide Squad film. Controversy broke out over the Clown Prince of Crime sporting a new set of tats, including a forehead tattoo that said damaged (talk about a drama queen). Critics, myself included, suggested this look for the Joker was more like an obsessed Joker fanatic than the actual Joker. It seemed as though the film was doomed before it started filming. But fear not, new images have been leaked, revealing a much less tattooed Joker, reminiscent of Anthony Hopkins' Hannibal Lector. So why? Why would David Ayer and Warner Bros lie? I'm glad you asked.
The DC Universe has booted up it's connected cinematic universe in a hurry, as if they don't act now, they will miss billions of potential dollars. Batman, as one of the most popular characters in DC will obviously have to be a part of this, which is counter-intuitive when it is considered that the last set of Batman films were out only three years ago. A series of films in which one of the greatest performances within the genre took place, Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker. Now obviously, the Joker has to be a part of the Cinematic Universe, but replacing the late Ledger seems an impossible task.
Warner Bros already did a great job in casting. The very talented Jared Leto, coming off an oscar, signed on to be our new Uncle J. "But this, in itself might still be enough," worries Warner Brothers. So they employ an old political tactic. They give an image of Jared Leto all tatted up. They know it will cause a stir. They'd never take a risk this big. I mean, they're DC. But they purposefully showed a controversial Joker so that when the released the real images of the Joker, there would be a collective sigh of relief. And in that sigh of relief, no one will be thinking "hmm, this is good, but not as good as Ledger's." They're thinking "He doesn't have tattoos! Oh and it's good!"