Ode to the dark side
WHEN I Wla' I' l} "THE My or THE HENRI"
can
can
...
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
92 comments displayed.
#133 to #67
-
allamericandude (01/06/2016) [-] Yeah. That movie ***** you up, like, emotionally. But it was a legit 10/10 performance by all the main actors.
#46
-
daniboyi (01/06/2016) [-] I wouldn't really call Loki a compelling character.
His whole character-arch is either being a whiny brat who whines over not getting to be king and daddy not loving him and as a villain, he was basically the lapdog of another more powerful villain.
He was quite funny and entertaining to watch, but his character is nothing major.
His whole character-arch is either being a whiny brat who whines over not getting to be king and daddy not loving him and as a villain, he was basically the lapdog of another more powerful villain.
He was quite funny and entertaining to watch, but his character is nothing major.
#98 to #46
-
schneidend (01/06/2016) [-] Eh. Loki's not really whiny. He had a pretty raw deal, actually. In the MCU, his origins were kept secret, and he was being groomed to succeed Odin even though they never intended for that to happen, and he found out both at basically the same time. All he ever really wanted was to live up to his potential, and the people who encouraged him were planning on never allowing him to do so. And, at the same time, Thor was given everything, despite not being as smart or as talented when it came to the actual work of leadership, and not even that many orders of magnitude better at fighting. He was basically stuck just being Thor's brother, and was not going to be allowed to do any of the things he was born to do because he was born a frost giant and Thor was not.
I'd be pretty pissed off, too.
I'd be pretty pissed off, too.
#101 to #98
-
daniboyi (01/06/2016) [-] Pissed off enough to try and take over the world and basically enslave all humanity, while killing several people in the process?
Yes. Loki was not treated fairly, but he overreacted wayyy too much and that kind of makes me question his skills as a leader in the first place.
'let me have my way with everything or I will turn into a tyrant and kill people I am trying to rule over!"
Yes. Loki was not treated fairly, but he overreacted wayyy too much and that kind of makes me question his skills as a leader in the first place.
'let me have my way with everything or I will turn into a tyrant and kill people I am trying to rule over!"
#106 to #101
-
schneidend (01/06/2016) [-] Granted. But, at the same time, it's really nothing Odin wouldn't do if he was taking back the throne from a usurper. Think of Odin in both movies, the wrath over disobedience (angrily banishing Thor in the first movie, then declaring him a traitor to be killed in order to stop him in the second), the ruthlessness in his decision-making (he was willing to let the dark elves lay siege to Asgard and kill many people in order to have home field advantage), and you basically have Loki except Odin is already king. Loki was merely raised to be his father's son, and when you deny Odin his throne, he ***** all of your **** up.
#107 to #106
-
daniboyi (01/06/2016) [-] Oh, I fully know and is the first to admit that Odin is a terrible father. One of the worst.
But I also believe that the actions of the father does not mean the raised child gets a free pass for future actions.
Loki has a somewhat sad backstory that could be expanded upon in the movie-universe, but I still don't enjoy him as a character.
Actually my main problem with Loki was that he was a lapdog for another main villain. He was not a villain. He was a minion for a villain. A henchman. A grunt.
That kind of takes major points off in the whole 'threatening-villain' part of him.
But I also believe that the actions of the father does not mean the raised child gets a free pass for future actions.
Loki has a somewhat sad backstory that could be expanded upon in the movie-universe, but I still don't enjoy him as a character.
Actually my main problem with Loki was that he was a lapdog for another main villain. He was not a villain. He was a minion for a villain. A henchman. A grunt.
That kind of takes major points off in the whole 'threatening-villain' part of him.
#112 to #107
-
schneidend (01/06/2016) [-] Well, naturally, Loki's crimes aren't okay just because Odin would do the same **** . My point is he was raised to do what Odin does and think of it as the burden of leadership. He was raised to act this way, and then when he started behaving like he thought he was supposed to, everybody was like whoa Loki you're crazy and didn't bother to explain why. Just as frustrating as finding out you'll never amount to anything because you're an inferior species. Really, Loki was only wrong because, unlike Odin, his plans didn't succeed. Now, he IS Odin, and nobody can even tell the ******* difference. Food for thought.
Villain alliances don't somehow diminish the villains taking part. That's silly. And, hell, being a henchman isn't even a deal breaker. Taskmaster is a professional henchman who trains other henchmen. That didn't stop him from taking on the Avengers by himself and winning. He's a badass. Period.
Likewise, Loki took down all of SHIELD's resources and nearly had the Avengers murder each other. Him making a deal with Thanos was irrelevant to the threat he posed.
Villain alliances don't somehow diminish the villains taking part. That's silly. And, hell, being a henchman isn't even a deal breaker. Taskmaster is a professional henchman who trains other henchmen. That didn't stop him from taking on the Avengers by himself and winning. He's a badass. Period.
Likewise, Loki took down all of SHIELD's resources and nearly had the Avengers murder each other. Him making a deal with Thanos was irrelevant to the threat he posed.
#120 to #112
-
daniboyi (01/06/2016) [-] "That didn't stop him from taking on the Avengers by himself and winning."
Erhhh... no.
Loki took on Captain America and nearly won.
Loki got beaten by Hulk alone.
It was Loki's army that took on the entire team and nearly won. Therefor not on his own.
And you are partly right about being a henchman does not take value away... from some villains.
I always saw Loki as a leader, as a person who is the one making the decisions and manipulating others to do his will, whether unknown or known to the manipulated person.
I don't see Loki as one that goes on his knees and says 'yes my master' to anyone. Not even Thanos.
I mean... try to imagine the Joker going out, destroying Gotham and in the end it is revealed he was doing it to please Bane. Kind of diminishes his character a bit, right?
Basically. It was not Loki who posed a threat. He was easily taken care of.
It was the army given to Loki by Thanos that posed a threat. Without the army, Loki would have been nothing in the movie.
Erhhh... no.
Loki took on Captain America and nearly won.
Loki got beaten by Hulk alone.
It was Loki's army that took on the entire team and nearly won. Therefor not on his own.
And you are partly right about being a henchman does not take value away... from some villains.
I always saw Loki as a leader, as a person who is the one making the decisions and manipulating others to do his will, whether unknown or known to the manipulated person.
I don't see Loki as one that goes on his knees and says 'yes my master' to anyone. Not even Thanos.
I mean... try to imagine the Joker going out, destroying Gotham and in the end it is revealed he was doing it to please Bane. Kind of diminishes his character a bit, right?
Basically. It was not Loki who posed a threat. He was easily taken care of.
It was the army given to Loki by Thanos that posed a threat. Without the army, Loki would have been nothing in the movie.
#122 to #120
-
schneidend (01/06/2016) [-] I was talking about Taskmaster, hence why that was a separate paragraph.
Loki never got on his knees. Even if neither saw it that way, with Thanos thinking he was being a benevolent god granting some power to a weaker servant, or Loki manipulating Thanos into giving him free **** , they both thought they were the bigger man in that arrangement.
Loki underestimated the Avengers, and got whooped by Hulk, but he was the manipulator. As I said, he nearly got them to kill each other FOR him, all while keeping them convinced they were the ones who were winning. That's quite the masterstroke.
Loki never got on his knees. Even if neither saw it that way, with Thanos thinking he was being a benevolent god granting some power to a weaker servant, or Loki manipulating Thanos into giving him free **** , they both thought they were the bigger man in that arrangement.
Loki underestimated the Avengers, and got whooped by Hulk, but he was the manipulator. As I said, he nearly got them to kill each other FOR him, all while keeping them convinced they were the ones who were winning. That's quite the masterstroke.
#123 to #122
-
daniboyi (01/06/2016) [-] But they weren't even close to killing each other. Yes. Iron Man and Thor duked it out for a few minutes without any major injuries and Iron Man and Captain America had a bit of a cock-fight, but that was the most of it all. He did more damage to SHIELD than he did to the Avengers.
At worst he was, partly, the cause of the Hulk being released, but even then none of the avengers came close to dying from that little episode.
I guess it might just be me, who was not really impressed by Loki personally. I honestly thought Ultron was a much bigger threat to the world than Loki came close to.
At worst he was, partly, the cause of the Hulk being released, but even then none of the avengers came close to dying from that little episode.
I guess it might just be me, who was not really impressed by Loki personally. I honestly thought Ultron was a much bigger threat to the world than Loki came close to.
#124 to #123
-
schneidend (01/06/2016) [-] Well, yeah, it was the sequel. They had to step up their game.
But, Thor was nearly killed by the drop pod cage, and might have been killed by Hulk if things had gone worse.
All in all, it was a pretty good plan. But, family movie, heroes gotta win. It's understandable.
But, Thor was nearly killed by the drop pod cage, and might have been killed by Hulk if things had gone worse.
All in all, it was a pretty good plan. But, family movie, heroes gotta win. It's understandable.
#126 to #124
-
daniboyi (01/06/2016) [-] I doubt the Hulk could defeat Thor, at least in the movie-verse.
They are shown, to some extend, to be pretty equal in battle.
Hulk got the brute strength.
Thor can fly and has his hammer as well as strategy rather than mindless charging.
I can't argue against the drop pod cage, other than saying we have no evidence it could kill Loki or Thor. All we got was Nick saying it could kill Loki, which might have been a bluff at best. Weak argument, but the best I could come up with.
They are shown, to some extend, to be pretty equal in battle.
Hulk got the brute strength.
Thor can fly and has his hammer as well as strategy rather than mindless charging.
I can't argue against the drop pod cage, other than saying we have no evidence it could kill Loki or Thor. All we got was Nick saying it could kill Loki, which might have been a bluff at best. Weak argument, but the best I could come up with.
#127 to #126
-
schneidend (01/06/2016) [-] Thor was pretty eager to get out of there and not find out, so let's assume he would have at least been brutally maimed or crippled, if not dead.
#130 to #128
-
schneidend (01/06/2016) [-] I think he was awesome in part because Tom Hiddleston is a really great actor for the part.
#7
-
doctorcamden (01/06/2016) [-] I like the villains in things because I understand that "good" "evil" "right" and "wrong" are all matters of perspective, and well-written villains will have real motivation behind their actions.
#105 to #7
-
emiyashirou (01/06/2016) [-] Well, I mean, the main villain in Wheel of Time is a pretty good antagonist, even though his motivation is literally being evil incarnate.
#139 to #6
-
studbeefpile (01/06/2016) [-] That's a poor example though, because Hitler wasn't a villain at all.
#151 to #139
-
guillem (01/06/2016) [-] Oh no, he sure was a good guy! In fact, he was the best guy in the world!
That, my friend, was sarcasm. What Hitler envisioned caused inconmensurable suffering throughout Europe, tearing the continent apart and putting an end to millions upon millions of lives. I know liking Hitler is "le cool now,", at least for a part of the users on this website, but I still don't get why, and I can only assume there are a lot of troll-baiters. It is stupid.
That, my friend, was sarcasm. What Hitler envisioned caused inconmensurable suffering throughout Europe, tearing the continent apart and putting an end to millions upon millions of lives. I know liking Hitler is "le cool now,", at least for a part of the users on this website, but I still don't get why, and I can only assume there are a lot of troll-baiters. It is stupid.
#157 to #151
-
arreatface (01/06/2016) [-] > not liking hitler
common people, its the current year ! 2016 people wake up !
common people, its the current year ! 2016 people wake up !
#162 to #156
-
hillbillypowpow (01/06/2016) [-] I don't know what you're talking about man, Hitler did nothing wrong
#72 to #59
-
donbionicle ONLINE (01/06/2016) [-] What are you talking about, I loved Jax and Dakter!
#18 to #14
-
thechosentroll (01/06/2016) [-] He's not the villain, though. More like an anti-hero and a plot device.
#27 to #18
-
vladhellsing (01/06/2016) [-] The Saints aren't villains either. And Alucard would be the villain in any other circumstance.
#34 to #27
-
thechosentroll (01/06/2016) [-] Hellsing doesn't really HAVE a villain. It's very Warhammer-y - no good guys or bad guys, just a bunch of crazy sons of bitches killing eachother over contrived ******** .
#83
-
mikhailovych ONLINE (01/06/2016) [-] I'm not going to lie I do hate villains who's only purpose is to be evil
Dr Who does it so ******* much for instance the daleks have one purpose "Exterminate" Why? What motive do they actually have they make no sense at all
There has been very few evil people in history that didn't think they were doing the right thing
Like Hitler (inb4 "We know he was right, etc" ) He genuinely believed that killing all the jews would fix the world's woes, he might have even pitied the allies for having the wool pulled over their eyes
Villains like the daleks were just written to be evil so that the audience can hate them.
Dr Who does it so ******* much for instance the daleks have one purpose "Exterminate" Why? What motive do they actually have they make no sense at all
There has been very few evil people in history that didn't think they were doing the right thing
Like Hitler (inb4 "We know he was right, etc" ) He genuinely believed that killing all the jews would fix the world's woes, he might have even pitied the allies for having the wool pulled over their eyes
Villains like the daleks were just written to be evil so that the audience can hate them.
#95 to #83
-
schneidend (01/06/2016) [-] Well, actually, the daleks are based on Hitler/Nazis. They believe they're perfect, the master race, and therefore everybody else should either die or be enslaved.
#57 to #52
-
guitarassassin (01/06/2016) [-] More specifically, it's from the first movie in the series "Pitch Black". Probably still is the best one in the series.
#78 to #57
-
lurkerfox (01/06/2016) [-]
yes it is, and spawned perhaps the best 'movie adaptation' of a video game if you can call it that, since the game is a prequel to the movie in Escape From Butcher Bay.
Normally that specific genre of shooty adventure borderline metroidvania in 3D isn't up my alley, but I loved the hell out of that game.
Normally that specific genre of shooty adventure borderline metroidvania in 3D isn't up my alley, but I loved the hell out of that game.
#48 to #8
-
sciper (01/06/2016) [-] I see Hitler as someone with good heart and will who let his own monster to corrupt him.
Nazis were horrible. Hitler wasn't. Hitler needed an enemy to join Germany back and start rebuilding it. He chose the Jews, people who lived rich and fat for having all the shekels while the Germans starved. At first, it was justice. Taking the properties and bussinesses from the Jews was a good movement. But then Hitler's followers started radicalising themselves. Concentration camps were founded. Then they started killing them. Hitler didn't wanted any of that, but he had no choice to give his approval, because the damage was already done. The Nazi party was horrible, a place full of extremists and thugs, and the Germans despised them. In the German army, calling someone a Nazi was a common insult.
Hitler did nothing wrong. Excepting creating the Nazis.
Nazis were horrible. Hitler wasn't. Hitler needed an enemy to join Germany back and start rebuilding it. He chose the Jews, people who lived rich and fat for having all the shekels while the Germans starved. At first, it was justice. Taking the properties and bussinesses from the Jews was a good movement. But then Hitler's followers started radicalising themselves. Concentration camps were founded. Then they started killing them. Hitler didn't wanted any of that, but he had no choice to give his approval, because the damage was already done. The Nazi party was horrible, a place full of extremists and thugs, and the Germans despised them. In the German army, calling someone a Nazi was a common insult.
Hitler did nothing wrong. Excepting creating the Nazis.
#82 to #8
-
neoraed (01/06/2016) [-] i think that instead of the monster society paints him as, he was just as human as all of us, and the lesson learned by reading hitler's life is that anyone can become hitler if they're in the position for it and that he was the wrong guy in the best position at the worst time
#84 to #8
-
spoopyskeleton (01/06/2016) [-] He did what HE thought was right, which resulted in the death of many, many people.
Yes, he was looking out for HIS people. No one elses.
Yes, he was looking out for HIS people. No one elses.
#115 to #8
-
scorcho (01/06/2016) [-] you left a few bits out.
like the genocide.
or the borderline dystopian police state.
i know a few people who were actually alive back then.
my neighbor was a old woman who lived through both world wars in germany.
she could have told you some **** that would make your retarded toenails curl.
noone enjoyed nazi germany, but the nazi elite. nobody.
i have heard some retarded **** in my life, but people trying to romanticise hitler and the nazis have got to take the retard cake.
like the genocide.
or the borderline dystopian police state.
i know a few people who were actually alive back then.
my neighbor was a old woman who lived through both world wars in germany.
she could have told you some **** that would make your retarded toenails curl.
noone enjoyed nazi germany, but the nazi elite. nobody.
i have heard some retarded **** in my life, but people trying to romanticise hitler and the nazis have got to take the retard cake.
#121 to #115
-
mattdoggy (01/06/2016) [-] We're all the heroes in our own personal fable is the point i'm trying to make
Also Hitler didn't just take power, he was given it. You can't pretend like the majority of Germans didn't want him to be in charge.
Also i never tried to defend him or cover up the wars or genocide, just defend him at his own view point
Also Hitler didn't just take power, he was given it. You can't pretend like the majority of Germans didn't want him to be in charge.
Also i never tried to defend him or cover up the wars or genocide, just defend him at his own view point
#3
-
anon (01/06/2016) [-] **anonymous used "*roll picture*"**
**anonymous rolled image** Maybe I am not the only one, but I always was curious as to what would happen if the villain won in the end.
**anonymous rolled image** Maybe I am not the only one, but I always was curious as to what would happen if the villain won in the end.
#2
-
kenshirokisame (01/05/2016) [-] Oh yes, raymond reddington. I cannot wait until this next season starts
#135 to #2
-
crimsongungnir (01/06/2016) [-] I just finished the second season on Netflix, gotta watch the third online. Such a good show, though, especially due to Raymond Reddington, honestly I was surprised by how good of an actor James Spader is, having not seen him in anything else besides Blacklist and the Avengers.
#136 to #135
-
kenshirokisame (01/06/2016) [-] i recommend Wolf with Jack Nicholson and Boston Legal with William Shatner. Does amazing in both
#21 to #2
-
fightforfate (01/06/2016) [-] he was the best thing about the blacklist
possibly the only good thing
possibly the only good thing
#20
-
thechosentroll (01/06/2016) [-]
I root for the villain most of the time, because they actually feel like regular people to me. They have dreams and ambitions, they work hard to amass wealth and power, so they can start to enact their thoroughly thought out and well-prepared plan. Then comes along some insufferable Mary-Sue who's immune to bullets and explosions or has some **** and starts ******* with years of work and careful preparation, because "it's the right thing to do". Who the **** does that? Who's OK with being shot at non-stop for two hours, just because "it's the right thing to do"? No one except the heroes, because their only reason to exist and their only driving force is "I am the arbitrary good guy".
#68
-
opisme (01/06/2016) [-] TFA Spoilers Am I the only one who wanted Kylo Ren to absolutely smash rey and finn? I wanted to see a badass sith fight with Kylo killing them.
#110 to #109
-
congthea (01/06/2016) [-] Yes, he may have been injured, but that doesn't mean he loses to someone who has only just picked up a lightsaber and attempted to fight with it. The only reason she won was because she had to win, or else it wouldn't have been resolved in a 'positive' way. There is absolutely no reason for a partially-trained dark jedi to lose to someone like that. And don't get me started on the rest of rey's ******** .
#91 to #68
-
illegalartist (01/06/2016) [-] I dont consider kylo a sith but i was pleasantly surprised when he ended han
