Christopher Eccleston is playing Malekith

[Loki882]

Originally Posted by herolee10

Sadly, the only Dr. Doom that we've gotten on the big screen was anything but "interesting".

I was referring to comics Doom. Never speak of that bastardization of his character ever again.

[iwontsaveu]

Originally Posted by BigThor

Yep I was referring to Malekith's official character description where he was called "the cruel ruler of the Dark Evles". He sounds truely evil and sometimes I need a break from "misunderstood" bad guys and I just want a villain that make you hate them. I might get flack for this but I want Thor to "kill" Malekith, he's not Supes it's perfectly within his character to kill a villain he doesn't care about once they're a big enough threat.

True! I would love to see some heroic brutality from Thor. that's why i want a black panther movie so bad, dude does whatever.

[BigThor]

Originally Posted by iwontsaveu

True! I would love to see some heroic brutality from Thor. that's why i want a black panther movie so bad, dude does whatever.

Yes he does, Black Panther is one of top 10 favorite superheroes.

[Incredible Hans]

This villain will be great!!!

(Unless, of course, at some point during the movie we see him coming from the toilet and learn that he isn't really Malekith but Sarah Jessica Parker after plastic surgery gone wrong and that the real Malekith is actually Egghead.)

[Doctor Who]

Originally Posted by Incredible Hans

This villain will be great!!!

(Unless, of course, at some point during the movie we see him coming from the toilet and learn that he isn't really Malekith but Sarah Jessica Parker after plastic surgery gone wrong and that the real Malekith is actually Egghead.)

I pray. From what I've heard though, he seems a very tragic inflicted character. Lost his wife, his children; the man is out for blood. This should be a sight to see.

[Loki882]

Yes, he's a vengeance-obsessed psychopath. He really is like Nero from Star Trek.

[Bren]

Why can't he just be evil.........

[ctsketch]

Originally Posted by Bren

Why can't he just be evil.........

because that's boring

[Bren]

Not to me. I found Nero (tragic) boring and Joker (no reason) interesting. It's in the writing.

I just thought a pure evil dude would have been fun.

edit: of course, Marvel's track record for non-sympathetic villains (Red Skull, Abomination etc) isn't so hot imo so yeah.....

[AndrewGilkison]

Nero did some pretty evil acts in Star Trek (destroying Spock's home planet and killing billions of its inhabitants, killing Kirks dad, among others). He was basically a terrorist, doing evil stuff and justifying it by claiming to be the victim. It takes more than a tragic past for a villain to be a sympathetic character.

[BoredGuy]

yeah but joker was chaos, and basically an epic troll, and the flip side to batman's coin, not just cackling "i wanna take over the world because i'd be a totally awesome ruler" evil
they all need their motivations, even if it's just "to watch the (batman's) world burn"

[Mjölnir]

The Joker was very nicely played but he wasn't a very deep character. Depth is always better when well executed imo.

[STR1]

I don't know if this has been posted already:


http://fansided.com/2013/10/16/thor-...alekith-wakes/

[DarthSkywalker]

Originally Posted by Mjölnir

The Joker was very nicely played but he wasn't a very deep character. Depth is always better when well executed imo.

Ledger's Joker is is very deep. Ledger didn't win an Oscar because he died, he won one because he was incredible and added layers to the agent of chaos. The performance is incredibly nuanced. How he tells his stories, how be plays with his knives, his choice of words, how he handles different people. He seems shaky, portraying himself almost as someone who doesn't quite know what he is doing in his first meeting with the mob. Then his entire demeanor takes on a much darker ton with the body bag scene. His entire time in the GPD is incredible. From the first sight of him in the jail cell to his explosive exit.

Ledger and Nolan made the Joker a reflection of their take on Batman. He is both a response and result of The Dark Knight. In his efforts to stop the mafia he created chaos, he created the freak.

[BigThor]

The poster who supposedly saw the film thought Kurse's fight with Thor was better than Malekith's. That's kinda hard to believe due to Malekith having all these magical powers not to mention that his fight will take to the skies as well as the ground.

[Octoberist]

Originally Posted by Mjölnir

The Joker was very nicely played but he wasn't a very deep character. Depth is always better when well executed imo.

I think you're just saying that due to a certain..bias.

[Mjölnir]

Originally Posted by DarthSkywalker

Ledger's Joker is is very deep. Ledger didn't win an Oscar because he died, he won one because he was incredible and added layers to the agent of chaos. The performance is incredibly nuanced. How he tells his stories, how be plays with his knives, his choice of words, how he handles different people. He seems shaky, portraying himself almost as someone who doesn't quite know what he is doing in his first meeting with the mob. Then his entire demeanor takes on a much darker ton with the body bag scene. His entire time in the GPD is incredible. From the first sight of him in the jail cell to his explosive exit.

Ledger and Nolan made the Joker a reflection of their take on Batman. He is both a response and result of The Dark Knight. In his efforts to stop the mafia he created chaos, he created the freak.

I think we look at depth differently. I mean that I don't get any deep insights into what motivates him (the "some men just want to watch the world burn" explanation is a shallow one). The performance is very layered but for depth of character I think motivation is a very significant part. The Joker isn't meant to be understood, as far as I gather, but that doesn't change that there are deeper characters in the world of movies.

As for winning an award, I don't put much stock in the Academy at all, even when I happen to agree with them. So much politics and other aspects that are separated from what it should be (and yes, I do think his death was a significant factor), and it's of course also mainly a national thing where the movies of the rest of the world play a minor part. That doesn't stop me from having the opinion that Ledger was absolutely fantastic in the role. For me his Joker is the reason to watch that movie and I keep longing for him to come on screen when the movie focuses on other things.

Originally Posted by Octoberist

I think you're just saying that due to a certain..bias.

And I think you've been too exposed to fan wars to jump to that simplistic conclusion. I didn't compare him to Malekith as I have no definitive opinion at all about him before seeing the movie. Especially as I'm not watching any promotional things after the second trailer, so I've hardly seen him.

Ledger's Joker is one of my three favorite superhero movie villains (and I don't rank those), so I'm in no way biased against him. I just happen to think that grey characters with conflicting motivations are the most interesting ones, and I think villains that I can identify with, or agree with, on some level make for better experiences. I do not particularly care for just "good vs evil", even though that's been done well too.

[ctsketch]

Joker was interesting but he didn't have depth...he had no motivation, no one knew what made him tick...his complete lack of depth is actually what made him interesting...he was crazy and chaotic,....pure and simple.

Not the stereotypical I want to rule the world and get money kind of evil just....evil...for evil's sake

[warriorking]

Originally Posted by ctsketch

Joker was interesting but he didn't have depth...he had no motivation, no one knew what made him tick...his complete lack of depth is actually what made him interesting...he was crazy and chaotic,....pure and simple.

Not the stereotypical I want to rule the world and get money kind of evil just....evil...for evil's sake

Plus any 8 year old with a gun could have taken the joker out..
Malekith on the other hand is way beyond anything the joker ever posed..

[DaddlerTheDalek]

Malekith was a Great Villain. Really menacing.

[spider-neil]

Great? He's terrible. Not that that's his fault, he isn't on screen long enough to flesh out. Why is he doing what he does? What motivates him. Terrible and a waste of a talented actor.

[jmc]

He's one dimensional.

[psylockolussus]

He also doesn't have much personality. He was very stoic. Replace him to a robot and the movie is still the same.

[jmc]

More or less. That said, the first act short changes a lot of characters, so maybe there's something on the cutting room floor. I'm actually curious to know how much footage was removed from the movie, it really feels like there are parts missing in the first act.

[spider-neil]

Imho the best villians are the one that from their point of view their plan makes perfect sense and whilst you can't condone their actions you can at least 'understand' their point of view.

What's Malekith point of view? The movie would have been far better if it had simply said he is a agent/herald of a higher authority and basically a pawn in a larger scheme at least that way you can pass the buck with regards to motivation.
For me Malekith is the worst comic book movie villian since the Chitauri.