It doesn't contradict it. I was just saying that Indy is less replicable than the Joker but I realized that by saying that I might be giving the impression that I voted for Indy when I didn't. As great a character as Ledger's Joker is they'll be another Joker coming along in a decade or two. To my mind this makes Indy more iconic than Ledger's Joker (even if, pound for pound, Joker was the better character). In 40 years, I think there's a good chance that we'll look back on Indy in nostalgia similar to that connected to George Bailey or Rick from Casablanca. I don't see this happening for Joker because they'll be other Jokers.Originally Posted by pathoftheturtle
Much. much. worse. Sorry, Woofer.That's a good point.But why would it contradict your vote? Maybe it makes Indy more unique or distinctive... but at the same time, *sigh* doesn't it imply something about how great the Joker character is?
On a side note, the Joker is my favorite villain...not only in comicdom but in general. So when you have him acted so well its going to be very very hard for anyone to take my vote from him.
Hey there's an idea for a Best Movie this or that poll....Best Movie Antagonist....not Villain mind you...antagonist. The word "villain" allows for anti-heroes like Michael Corleone who is, without a doubt, a villain. But he's also the protagonist of the story he's part of. (Alan Rickman's "Hans" from Die Hard comes to mind)
Reply With Quote