And right off the bat I'm forced to disagree with you entirely. I'm not going to parrot Luciens' words back at you because they speak for themselves. Instead I'll remind you that good characters have absolutely nothing to do with their 'achievements.' A character can achieve jack fvcking shit and still succeed as a character with a developed and interesting personality.
I, instead, like to judge characters as characters. The depth and strength of their personality, the themes that coalesce in them and their role in the narrative, the meaning behind their words and actions these things are what make a character great. Not how many spaceships he owns or planets he can blow up.
If all it took for a character to be great was power, ambition and achievements then I could create the greatest villian of all time right now on a notepad.
I would definately agree that these are issues to take into consideration, but not that they are exactly that important. As I said, power does not make a villian great.
Give the Joker godlike power and does he instantly become a better villian? No, of course not. The Joker has exactly the right level of power and ability that he should have in the narrative. He is essentially a dark counterpart to Batman. They are both geniuses and somewhat mad, one limited in his persuit of a cause, one utterly unrestrained in the persuit of no cause at all (I'm quoting the review here btw ). The characters work because they are dark reflections of each other, evenly matching in a fight that barely even takes place on the physical level, but rather on a philosophical one. So I ask again: Would the Joker be a better villian if he could shoot lightning from his fingertips.
In his narrative role as Batman's exact counterpart, absolutely not.
Yeah, acting shouldn't realy come into play, but it really does at the end of the day. Bad acting can make or break a character. Look at that guy you posted complaining about Bale's voice.
IDK, a portrayal is definately important in taking a character seriously. You can tell me how 'dangerous' Palpatine is all day long, but in the end, the guy on the screen just makes me laugh more times than most. >_>
Hal 9000 just killed a few astronauts.
Keyser Soze killed no-one on screen.
Did Jack Torrance from the Shining kill anyone?
Norman Bates killed like 2 people.
Are they shitty villians?
Examples?
They were willing but couldn't go through with it. They were civilians and couldn't just murder a boatload of people. Then the black guy through the criminals detonator out of the window. The other inmates didn't do anything because the guards had machine guns and when the dude was willing to hand it over the black guy stepped in and chucked that sucker nice and hard. Pretty simple stuff.
We know that, but does Dent? All he saw was a bunch of corrupt cops try to kill him. The Joker was in prison. He didn't know that the Joker planned to be caught. The corrupt police force and the mob were much more likely to have done it, and thats who he goes after, then after the man who allowed the corruption to exist under his nose, Gordon, and finally Batman, who saved him rather than Rachel.
Plus, y'know.... insane.
Lust for power on the scale that you create a galaxy spanning war and basically act like Doctor Doom on crack is certainly unrealistic. Its also incredibly lazy. Who needs to give a villian actual depth, motivation and character development when you can just say he does everything for 'POWAH'? Gee, thats never been done before. What an original character archetype.
Emphasis mine. Anakin murders children because a hideous monster said he can stop Anakin bad dreams. I'll give Lucas the benefit that he established 'dream dying = bad', but murdering children because of a dream is and always will be pretty fvcking stupid.
Plus Dent was actually insane from Rachel, y'know, actually dying. As opposed to just dreaming it. Anakin wasn't insane or mentally affected at all. He was worried, sure. But crazy? Fvck no.
cool bye
Re-read what I said. I didn't criticise Anakin being crazy, I criticised that you were using that to excuse his idiotic and nonsensical actions while laying into Dents own incredibly insane actions. You can't have it both ways Gideon.
Except that was jsut a bunch of BS he was spouting to convert Dent. He isn't a agent of chaos. Look at all these detailed and intricate plans he comes up with.
The Jokers primary motivation is unclear, but imo, he's trying to prove that people are really no different than he is. That they'll turn on each other the moment the chips are down. The bankheist, where all the crooks turned on each other, the 'tryouts', where the last man standing gets to live, turning the city against batman, the man who selflessly cleaned up their streets at his own personal risk, the boat with the detonators and finally Harvey Dent. He's always showing that people are ******* who will turn and bite the hand that feeds them the first chance they get. That they will always turn on each other. That they're all just like him.
He's not a monster, he's just ahead of the current.
And unoriginal and boring and lame as ****.
__________________
Last edited by Nephthys on May 27th, 2011 at 03:06 AM
Gideon, are you sure you're not trying so hard to establish Palpatine as a superior character simply because he's your favourite villain?
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
Though theres always the greats. Patrick Bateman, Norman Bates, Hal 9000, Keyser Soze, Jack Torrance, Hans Landa, Nihilus, Micheal Mayers, Dracula and Kevin Bacon.
__________________
Last edited by Nephthys on May 27th, 2011 at 03:17 AM
Highest quality villain I guess... Basically wich villains do you think are more complex/intresting than others. And yeah in cinema not books or television.
Your predecessor once made the mistake of questioning my ability to point out the obvious. Surely you are not so foolish as to make the same mistake?
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
My predecessor also warned, sternly I believe, against the dangers of assuming against facts not in evidence. I believe Palpatine is the best villain in cinema history; he is by no means my favorite. He's not even my favorite in Star Wars.
Annie Wilkes, Hannibal Lector, Freddy Krueger, Frank from Blue velvet, Anton Chigurh, The Exorcist demons, Tetsuo, Gendo Ikari ...... gah, can't think of anyone else. >_>
__________________
Last edited by Nephthys on May 27th, 2011 at 03:30 AM
Beefy, you hear Kerr on Lebron being the best in the NBA? what a game man. I'll give it to rose, he is quick, but he needs to grow 5 inches to score on lebron.
Ledger's Joker followed closely by Landa. Anton Chigurh, Keyser Soze, Lecter, and Patrick Bateman as intriguing and complex. Psychopaths and/or mysterious manipulators are always fascinating, especially since you can't discern just what they are.
Pretty standard, really. I'd say I'm leaning only towards the popular villains, but sometimes they're popular for a reason.
On top of them I feel I should add Palpatine, Vader, Tarkin, Commodus, Tyler Durden, Ozymandias, Cal Hockley, Col. Tavington, Edward Longshanks, Charlie Prince, Angel Eyes, Maj. Koenig, and Agent Smith as very entertaining villains, but not ones whom I'm intrigued by and don't find myself wondering about their pasts or origin of their nature.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
No, he needs a team that can play, otherwise he's Cleveland Lebron. He owned him a couple of times but when they keep giving him the ball back with 5 seconds to shoot, there's nothing he can do. Chicago and OKC are the same in that they are unbelievably bad at the end of games, and Lebron has Bosh and Wade to pick up the slack on O and D so it's a lot easier for him to guard Rose. Rose knows he's the only offensive option. With that said, he was pitiful today in every aspect of the game. Couldn't hit free throws, too many turnovers, etc. They need to trade Korver and Boozer for an all star 2 guard.
I still think Dallas can beat this team, especially with Dirk trying to avenge 2006.
). The characters work because they are dark reflections of each other, evenly matching in a fight that barely even takes place on the physical level, but rather on a philosophical one. So I ask again: Would the Joker be a better villian if he could shoot lightning from his fingertips. 
May 27th, 2011 02:51 AM
