Originally Posted by godisawesome
You should also consider that Loki's probably the best translated super villain of the entire Marvel Movie Universe. He's referred to by his name, dresses like the comicbook, has the grandiose plans and ostentation you expect, and he's got the key characteristics that have defined the character for decades. He's a better translation than any of Iron Man's villains and has more depth than Red Skull.
He's the exception to the one big advantage you can say the Bat films have over the Marvel ones; the Dark Knight Trilogy managed to justify and emphasize the theatricality and mythos of the villains, while the Marvel movies have succeeded mostly in making sure the villain's threat level remains the same, but tend to lack the interpretive flair you'd want them to keep, though this is mostly a flaw of the Iron Man films.
The Thor films probably have the easiest time making the heroes had villains feel mythic because of the whole aliens excuse.
I think the biggest thing with Thor and Loki is that I find them both to be interesting. So often you either get an interesting hero and a less interesting villain, or vice versa. In the Batman trilogy I only really cared for Batman in the first one (but Ra's al Ghul wasn't as interesting). In the other two I thought he was uninteresting compared to the main villains (the secondary villains were always wasted imo). The opposite with the Iron Man trilogy, where the villains don't match how good Tony Stark is.