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

[thealumnus]

IMO  Joker > Bane just because of the mind games. The Joker doesn't care about money, revenge, or even power he just loves the chaos. It's like the movie "Ocean's Thirteen", Joker doesn't care if he wins all the money he's just making the casino go broke. Something about that type of villain just appeals to me more . Also it's hard to judge Bane's input on the overall plan bc the moment the audience finds out Miranda is Talia al Ghul, It's assumed everything was planned by her. If that argument is made then Bane while one hell of a brawler is still just a lackey or pawn. Kinda in the eye of the Beholder. I loved both performances though and I have to give props to Hardy bc that Ledger perfomance wasn't easily to follow and he held his own. Here's a great write up arguing the that Bane isn't a pawn though :

http://whatculture.com/film/the-dar...-why-one-plot-twist-did-not-ruin-the-film.php

also why just keep it in Comicbooks?  :

Flintheart Glomgold > Magica De Spell

 

[ryda421]

Not sure if you're just trolling but Scar was a better villain than Loki.

that's what i meant

> means greater

 

[crazy ebw]

that's what i meant

> means greater

I'm pretty sure everyone who has a username on this forum knows what ">" means. He thought you were just saying it to be funny, and posted without actually feeling that way. To "troll" and just say something to say something.

 

[jordan23dotcom]

I'm convinced this isn't a real question

 

[crazy ebw]

I'm convinced this isn't a real question

I agree. It's almost as dumb as asking iron man or batman.

 

[jordan23dotcom]

^ yup, because batman clearly has 0 chance. Thread spillage! Come at me !!! Lol

 

[frink85]

The movie was destined for greatness. With Nolan at the helm and the most popular out of the Batman villains, the movie would of made bank regardless. Obviously Heath's untimely death added to it because a lot more people were intrigued and wanted to see exactly how he transformed himself. Not taking away anything from the performance, but it was a combination of a lot of things outside of what he did with the character.

agreed. for me at least it wasnt just the acting, but the adapted stories as well. "Killing Joke" and even "Long Halloween" are classic comic book stories, both adapted well into a movie and portrayed brilliantly by the cast. of course Ledger stole the show but as a whole it was great.

on topic, im a marvel fanboy and loved Avengers, but as stated before Loki just isnt the same as Joker. He doesnt have the same character depth or history as the Joker. In the comic books Loki is a foil for Thor and is a worthy foe but doesnt really come off as all that threatening since Thor stops him all the time. I cant even recall a time where Loki goes up against the entire Avengers theme (and i havent followed for years, so im not sure about the Fear Itself storyline since i know it involved the Asgardians).

while on the other hand, the Joker is THE ANTITHESIS of Batman. He is THE Batman villain. One of the reasons it worked so well. Joker has been around since day one, and theyve fought so much that there is so much history and psychology they were able to put into the movie. While i do feel that Ledger's death had something to do with the hype, that really was an awesome, Oscar-worthy performance. The Joker has so many facets (madman, clown, psychopath, cold blooded killer, sociopath, etc) and Ledger portrayed them all to a T at once. That was Daniel Day-Lewis type immersion

as for Bane, i also liked him better as a villain. He may not have the same twistedness as the Joker or the character depth, but thats kind of what made Hardy's performance all the better. Im not gonna say that portraying the Joker is "easier", but being terrified of a twisted madman with the squeaky voice in facepaint with green hair is understandable. Bane is the anti-Joker, calculated, cunning, physically imposing. Not crazy. So for me, Bane is a better villain because he has it all. He essentially is Batman's equal, but on the other side. Hes brilliant, incredibly strong, tactical, and cruel. To me he's Batman's greatest threat, someone who can match up with him equally or better in every way.

 

[unknwn]

Not sure if you're just trolling but Scar was a better villain than Loki.

that's what i meant

> means greater

Yes, thank you I know that.

 

[ryda421]

I'm pretty sure everyone who has a username on this forum knows what ">" means. He thought you were just saying it to be funny, and posted without actually feeling that way. To "troll" and just say something to say something.

oh

 

[unknwn]

I'm pretty sure everyone who has a username on this forum knows what ">" means. He thought you were just saying it to be funny, and posted without actually feeling that way. To "troll" and just say something to say something.

oh

All good brother.

*fistbump*

 

[unknwn]

I'm pretty sure everyone who has a username on this forum knows what ">" means. He thought you were just saying it to be funny, and posted without actually feeling that way. To "troll" and just say something to say something.

oh

All good brother.

*fistbump*

 

[adrian1221]

any clown could play the role of Loki

so the joker can play loki?

 

[crazy ebw]

so the joker can play loki?

View media item 318661

 

[mister friendly]

The movie was destined for greatness. With Nolan at the helm and the most popular out of the Batman villains, the movie would of made bank regardless. Obviously Heath's untimely death added to it because a lot more people were intrigued and wanted to see exactly how he transformed himself. Not taking away anything from the performance, but it was a combination of a lot of things outside of what he did with the character.

agreed. for me at least it wasnt just the acting, but the adapted stories as well. "Killing Joke" and even "Long Halloween" are classic comic book stories, both adapted well into a movie and portrayed brilliantly by the cast. of course Ledger stole the show but as a whole it was great.

on topic, im a marvel fanboy and loved Avengers, but as stated before Loki just isnt the same as Joker. He doesnt have the same character depth or history as the Joker. In the comic books Loki is a foil for Thor and is a worthy foe but doesnt really come off as all that threatening since Thor stops him all the time. I cant even recall a time where Loki goes up against the entire Avengers theme (and i havent followed for years, so im not sure about the Fear Itself storyline since i know it involved the Asgardians).

while on the other hand, the Joker is THE ANTITHESIS of Batman. He is THE Batman villain. One of the reasons it worked so well. Joker has been around since day one, and theyve fought so much that there is so much history and psychology they were able to put into the movie. While i do feel that Ledger's death had something to do with the hype, that really was an awesome, Oscar-worthy performance. The Joker has so many facets (madman, clown, psychopath, cold blooded killer, sociopath, etc) and Ledger portrayed them all to a T at once. That was Daniel Day-Lewis type immersion

as for Bane, i also liked him better as a villain. He may not have the same twistedness as the Joker or the character depth, but thats kind of what made Hardy's performance all the better. Im not gonna say that portraying the Joker is "easier", but being terrified of a twisted madman with the squeaky voice in facepaint with green hair is understandable. Bane is the anti-Joker, calculated, cunning, physically imposing. Not crazy. So for me, Bane is a better villain because he has it all. He essentially is Batman's equal, but on the other side. Hes brilliant, incredibly strong, tactical, and cruel. To me he's Batman's greatest threat, someone who can match up with him equally or better in every way.

Bane was very scary in the beginning of the movie but I think the Ledger's Joker was better. I liked the 3rd movie better at first but I saw the Dark Knight on TV recently and I think its better, alot stuff I didnt pick up the first time watching it

 

[crazy ebw]

Bane was very scary in the beginning of the movie but I think the Ledger's Joker was better. I liked the 3rd movie better at first but I saw the Dark Knight on TV recently and I think its better, alot stuff I didnt pick up the first time watching it

What didn't you pick up? I'm very interested.

 

[mister friendly]

Bane was very scary in the beginning of the movie but I think the Ledger's Joker was better. I liked the 3rd movie better at first but I saw the Dark Knight on TV recently and I think its better, alot stuff I didnt pick up the first time watching it

What didn't you pick up? I'm very interested.

I just remember the first time I watched thinking it was very long and kinda overrated but since Ive watched it again its much better

 

[swish]

 

[pharelfor3]

View media item 387209

awesome pic

 

[superantigen]

Loki = trickster god in Norse Mythology

Tricksters also double as Jesters in many western canons.

Jesters = Professional fools

Professional Fool = Clown/Joker

Thus, Loki = Joker, which is to say, LOKI is the Joker.


Boom, your mind has been officially blown!!!

Spoiler

But really though, Heath's Joker > Hiddleston's Loki.

...

 

[victor page]

Joker never cracked Bruce because he didn't know about his past and put everything together like Bane did.

 

What?

HE killed the love of his life. Get outta here.

 

[dipsetgeneral]

OP high

 

[ruxxx]

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

Repped.

 

[greatesqueape]

there was never anything remotely intimidating about Loki, he was a pawn to the Chitauri.
Joker>Bane>rush hour traffic>Loki.

 

[703 hwy]

Ledger's performance elevated the series to unforeseen heights. Batman Begins was a very solid movie, probably my favorite out of the series. But without Ledger, the series never gets as big as it does. 

The movie was destined for greatness. With Nolan at the helm and the most popular out of the Batman villains, the movie would of made bank regardless. Obviously Heath's untimely death added to it because a lot more people were intrigued and wanted to see exactly how he transformed himself. Not taking away anything from the performance, but it was a combination of a lot of things outside of what he did with the character.

Word, he was pumped up because of his death. He was good but nothing transceding.

 

[maddog345]

Hell No