Goddamn, what a tough question.
Wow.
DISCLAIMER: I am a fan of all three performances and characters.
That said...
Bardem played Anton Chigurh as if he were a living rock. He didn't emote all that much, show variation in his voice, or change his facial expression from a blank, stoic stare. Which together made for a very uneasy, chilling character, but any good actor could pull off as much with little preparation. Great character, but I'd say this is the weakest of the three (but I certainly don't mean that in a bad way).
Ledger, on the other hand, was the exact opposite, in that he played a character that required constant high energy. He changed his voice completely, was very physical and eccentric, and looked completely unrecognizable (but any actor would've looked unrecognizable under that makeup). However, having seen the film over the course of a year and a half, I must admit that certain elements of the performance come across as gimmicky (the tongue-flicking comes to mind). He played a deranged psychopath convincingly, but the character lacked dynamic (but that's more the script's fault and not so much Ledger's). As someone else said, the character was very "one note": crazed lunatic that just laughs at everything. And again, I'm not saying that as if it were bad.
Now we come to Waltz' Landa. What can I say? Spoke three languages almost effortlessly, stole every scene he was in, showed a wide range of emotion and energy, and clearly had fun with it all in the process. He nailed the part to the wall. He made it his *****.
It's a hard choice, but I really have to give it to Waltz.
![[A]](https://superherohype-data.community.forum/avatars/s/70/70800.jpg?1270390582){kind=avatar}
