Anthony, don’t you get it? Comparing Obama to the homicidal maniac in the 1989 movie is not racist, but comparing him to the homicidal maniac in the 2008 film is racist. It’s plain as day. However, if you were a bad person, as you clearly are, you might be tempted to conclude that race has nothing to do with it.
One of the reasons I stopped reading film criticism is because of the outrageously strained arguments that are trotted out to prove assertions like the one claiming that the 2008 Joker is more racist than the 1989 Joker. It is crushingly sad, but these “arguments” are what many academics regard as insightful observation.
But the Kennicott article could have really made a slam dunk had it made the following argument: The Joker makeup is a representation of “reverse-blackface”, which in turn proves that the anonymous creator of the poster wishes subconsciously that Obama were a white man. As you know, white people are never socialists, and never abuse government power, so by putting white make-up on a black man, the poster shows that a nefarious black man lurks under the more harmless visage of a white man (who just happens to be a homicidal maniac). Now, this only applies to the 2008 Joker, and not to the 1989 Joker. The 1989 Joker covered up his face with flesh-colored make-up, but it was a light flesh-tone symbolizing that the 1989 Joker was covering up his Joker face with white-man makeup, and thus the 1989 Joker is a symbol of white-ness while the 2008 Joker does no such thing, illustrating that he is in fact a crypto-black man. Therefore, the 1989 Joker is not racist, but the 2008 Joker is.
Or something.7:30 pm on August 6, 2009 Email Ryan McMaken