Was Loki (Tom Hidlesston) Just As Good As The Joker (Heath Ledger)???

[stillin729]

Can the sheep explain why I'm wrong without gifs?

any clown could play the role of Loki

 

[kingkoopa]

any clown could play the role of Loki

Great explanation

 

[airthompson]

Ledger>Hardy
Bane>Joker

In what aspect? Listen I'm not one of the NTers that's just gonna disagree.

I really want to know why you feel this way.

I feel the same for the fact Hardy had huge shoes to fill, and he nailed it. I don't wanna take away from his phenomenal performance in the Dark Knight, but Ledgers death had a big contribution to the creepiness of the movie. Watching him doing his final work was surreal. If he never passed away I think people wouldn't be afraid to admit Bane was a much more bad*** villain.

That damb voice was ill as ****

 

[antonlavey]

In what aspect? Listen I'm not one of the NTers that's just gonna disagree.

I really want to know why you feel this way.

Ledger had a better performance, Bane was a more formidable villain.

 

[kingkoopa]

I'm in no way saying he WAS better, I just don't see how it's a solid fact. Tom played the **** out of his role. Defiantly one of the most underrated super hero cast members ever!

 

[Bend_The_Knee]

View media item 350093

 

[jayfiend]

Ledger had a better performance, Bane was a more formidable villain.

I will agree with this. I honestly can't argue with it because Bane beat Batman pretty bad.

I went out Ji easy to me tho.

Joker was just ruthless man.

 

[mjgreatxii]

Might as well put Ivan Ooze from the Power Rangers movie in the conversation

Lulz all over this thread

 

[crazy ebw]

I will agree with this. I honestly can't argue with it because Bane beat Batman pretty bad.

I went out Ji easy to me tho.

Joker was just ruthless man.

I loved Jokers speeches and stuff, but every time Bane spoke on screen it was just amazing IMO.

The way he spoke TO Bruce and just breaking him down mentally and physically was a true sight to see. Joker never cracked Bruce because he didn't know about his past and put everything together like Bane did.

That's why I liked Bane better.

 

[unknwn]

Completely agree with you EBW.


Back to OP, you have your opinion and I have mine, but there's a good reason why nobody agrees with you.

 

[kingkoopa]

Completely agree with you EBW.


Back to OP, you have your opinion and I have mine, but there's a good reason why nobody agrees with you.

And the reason is.....

 

[AEA18]

Hell no!

Joker was serious and Loki was just corny.

 

[jayfiend]

And the reason is.....

Ok let's forget the acting for a second...

What did Loki do? The avengers punished dude.

What impact did he have other than few million or billion in damage?

Who did he kill or even beat up for that matter?

The joker had Gotham in a panic. Blowing up hospitals. Killing police commissioners and judges.

Bane had the city on lock and almost killed Batman.

Loki got snatched up like a doll and beat pretty bad.

 

[crazy ebw]

Because the character Loki isn't in the same league The Joker was as far as the movies they were in were concerned.

Joker absolutely annihilated Gotham with his trickery and mind games. Loki was a powerful foe that was fighting a battle with help from people outside of our world, and still lost. Once the Avengers stood up together it was a wrap for everything in NY.

Heath literally put his life into the Joker. The stories about dude in his room reading classic Joker comics ALL DAMN NIGHT are mind blowing and the dedication he used REALLY paid off on screen. Hiddleston as an actor was good, but was there any time when he was on screen and your eyes were glued wondering how the hell he sunk into that character? I truly doubt it.

Loki is good and Tom played it well, but considering how easy it was for that character to be portrayed, I honestly can't see how there is even ANY type of argument that dude is in the same league as Heath/Joker on this one.

You can argue Bane/joker, Heath/Nicholson, Heath/Hardy...not this.

 

[6 Rings G.O.A.T.]

.

 

[unknwn]

Completely agree with you EBW.


Back to OP, you have your opinion and I have mine, but there's a good reason why nobody agrees with you.

And the reason is.....

View media item 350178

 

[jayfiend]

View media item 350178

Thread...

Unless you guys want to continue debating about Joker and Bane

I just saw they're talking batman and iron man across the street. Imma head over there

 

[ciscokid23]

Heath did a phenomenal job playing the joker.read that he analyzed Stanley Kubricks a clockwork orange.RIP Mr Ledger

 

[antonlavey]

View media item 350178

//THREAD. My boys and I were saying, they couldn't come up with a better villain for the world's greatest team of superheros? Loki aka Skrillex wasn't believable as a worthy arch-nemesis for Hulk + Iron Man + Thor.

 

[jjs]

While watching Ledger, I was like : damn this guy is very good in that role.

Didn't get that feeling with Loki. He was good but not like Ledger.

 

[rook]

I put it like this...Loki was a hell of a villian. But being compared to Ledger is seriously like the comparison between HOF'ers in sports to All-Time greats. Ledger is legendary status with his role of Joker, Loki was VERY good. Just not Ledger level.

 

[3stheluckynumbe]

I liked Loki in the avengers more than Loki in Thor if that makes sense... although I still think a better villain could've been chose for avengers altogether

 

[jayfiend]

I don't agree with Loki.

But Iron Man looks like he's in a **** load of trouble in part 3

 

[sb]

ledger owned the dark knight. his performance was so outstanding that at times you forgot the movie was about batman. the joker stole the spotlight. that to me is huge.

i was watching the dark knight rises a few days ago. all of batman's foes made an appearance in the movie except the joker. imagine if ledger did not die. ras al ghul, scarecrow, the joker, and bane. the dark knight rises would of been at another level.

 

[shotsrangout]

Avengers was corny. I'm not even a batman stan but Ledger killed that role.