(No Country For Old Men) Chigurh vs (The Dark Knight) The Joker

Avatar image for nolubeplz
nolubeplz

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poll (No Country For Old Men) Chigurh vs (The Dark Knight) The Joker (19 votes)

(No Country For Old Men) Chigurh 68%
(The Dark Knight) The Joker 32%
The fight takes place at a creepy hotel
The fight takes place at a creepy hotel

Rules:

  1. Standard gear.
  2. They will be looking for each other at the Motel.
  3. Win by any means necessary.
  4. Basic knowledge.

Round 1 - Who wins in a fight?

Round 2 - Which villain is better acted?

Round 3 - Which villain is creepier?

No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided

 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5a20a68641bc7
deactivated-5a20a68641bc7

1969

Forum Posts

1028

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I'd say Chigurh wins. The fight seems to be on terms more familiar to him.

Avatar image for noone1996
Noone1996

15884

Forum Posts

400

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Chigurh stomps him in a fight. Heath Ledger did a better job though.

Avatar image for reaverlation
reaverlation

26398

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

What's standard gear for Joker?

Avatar image for mrmonster
mrmonster

25768

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Round 1: Chigurh. He was a very skilled killer. Joker showed very little evidence of actually having much skill. Most of his feats come from surprise attacks (ie the pencil trick). That would not work in a situation where two opponents know that the other is actively trying to kill him.

Rounds 2: The Joker. Both were tremendously well acted, but Joker just had a certain flare that Chigurh did not.

Round 3: Chigurh. Joker had creepy moments, but Chigurh's stare was terrifying. If you ask me, No Country for Old Men is the scariest non-horror movie of al time.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a5a76120d2ba
deactivated-5a5a76120d2ba

5989

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Round 1: Anton. He actually was a decent fighter and had some background training if I remember correctly. Joker was a much better planner and manipulator but never did anything impressive physically.

Round 2: Both were amazing but in different ways. I will say Joker was acted better simply because he had to be so many different chaotic facets. Anton was rather flat, but that is what he was supposed to be, a call calculating soulless murderer.

3. Anton. I did not find Joker very creepy, he was just crazy and insane, and a terrorist. Anton was a cold blooded, truely sociopathic, murderer. I find soulless calm more creepy than crazy chaotic mania.

Avatar image for jonez_
Jonez_

11499

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Round 1 - Who wins in a fight?

Joker's unpredictability will give him trouble and all, but Chigurh still blows his brains out.

Round 2 - Which villain is better acted?

Tie. Both phenomenal.

Round 3 - Which villain is creepier?

Chigurh's subtle insanity was a little more creepy than Joker's blatant insanity.

Avatar image for echostarlord117
echostarlord117

5619

Forum Posts

521

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

1. Chigurh. Unlike the Joker, he doesn’t mess around. Nolan’s Joker is more the type to play mind games with you, I feel. Chigurh seems more practical and efficient. He’d probably blow Joker’s head off while the latter monologues or something.

2. Both, easily. Ledger did the undoable and revolutionized one of the most difficult-to-play characters ever. I mean, it just blows my mind every time I see him perform that role. It was nigh flawless. Bardem’s performance, on the other hand, is considered by many professional psychologists to be the most accurate on-screen portrayal of a psychopath. That speaks for itself, really. I should note, too, that Chigurh in No Country for Old Men is the only non-horror villain that actually scared me. The gas station scene had me gripping my seat without me even noticing. Lol Utterly phenomenal...

3. Although is sort of contradicts what I said earlier, I’m gonna go with the Joker on this one. He’s so out-of-this-world that it’s unnerving. While Chigurh is A-level disturbing, the Joker is just something else. His mannerisms, his speech pattern, his thought process, his look... I feel like I should refer to him as an “it” sometimes. They’re both more or less functionally the same: mysterious, unstoppable, merciless, etc. The Joker’s unearthliness makes him just that much creepier to me, though.

Avatar image for bobandjim1260
bobandjim1260

1031

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

1. Chigurh would win in a fist fight and gunfight. But Joker has grenades, bombs, guns, knives, etc. Anton is far more skilled when it comes to traditional combat, but the joker wins round one due to pulling off a lot more with, basically, a lot less.

2. Both were supremely acted. Tie.

3. Chigurh was far more terrifying. The Joker never really scared me like Chigurh did. I think it's because, ultimately, Chigurh is a far more realistic interpretation of skilled killer. The Joker was more or less far too lucky and too intelligent for me to believe. Not saying there aren't people who are that intelligent in the world, but the amount of planning that would have to go perfectly right, the amount of perfect snap decisions made, the luck, etc. He's just way to perfect to be believable. Not a mark against him. The Joker is like Hannibal Lector, terrifying, but over the top.

Chigurh just seems far more realistic, which made him far more terrifying in my opinion. Plus, the subtle insanity combined with his cold ruthlessness is incredibly creepy to watch.

Avatar image for deactivated-60758db60e021
deactivated-60758db60e021

9525

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Chigurh seems like the better fighter so he takes R1.

Dead even for 2 and 3.