Master Index of Archived Threads


Thor (2011)

Trenton

0 votes

Thunder sandwich

0 votes

Thunderbolt and lightning very very frightening

1 votes

OKC

6 votes

Thunderstruck

1 votes

God of Thunder

2 votes

The Second Spitter Apr 21 2011 08:31 AM

(I'll chuck up a poll later as I'm a bit rushed). Difficult subject matter well- executed. Branagh has strikes a good balance between fantasy and reality. Don't think I've ever picked up a Thor graphic novel, but from what I can gather, it stays pretty faithful to the books. Unlike the current Batman movies, it makes no pretence about its origins and lacks their garrulousness. It's a comic book movie through and through, albeit one flavoured with Shakespearean seasoning (an obvious intention by the producers by hiring someone with Branagh's credentials to direct). Does it work, you ask? Well, for the most part, yes. Combined with the excellent CGI and spectacular scenery it's an above-average comic book movie. While some of the characters are written deeper to accomodate Branagh's background, they ultimately face the same constraints as all comic book characters. It's not the reason people go to see comic book films, and while the action sequences are decent, they are also quite unremarkable. More to the point, it's difficult to appreciate more fleshed-out characters when the story isn't an emotive experience and it was hard staying engaged for the entirety of the film. The story felt a bit disconnected from its characters - this is the problem with getting a comic book writer to come-up with a story and then dishing it off to a bunch of screenwriters for the screenplay. (I felt both could have benefitted from watching Superman 2, especially the parts where Superman loses his powers.) Chris Hensworth as Thor works okay. A bit rough around the edges and struggled at times in his old English accent and some of the dialogue. Indeed, he finds it hard to disguise his Aussie-ness. Personally I didn't find Thor's character's arc to be all that convincing, but again this is a problem of slack writing. Branagh's Shakespearian background comes to the fore with Loki's character (an amalgam of Macbeth, Iago and Edmund from King Lear). Hiddleston was my stand-out actor, he embraces the role of Loki brilliantly and was convincing in his motivations and actions. The result is one of the most complex on-screen comic book villains in a long time. I was mostly indifferent to Portman's performance. Her character was probably the most underdeveloped of any on screen. If their intention was to create a "plain Jane" character then it worked. But other than that, she looked good and delivered her lines efficiently. (Just don't expect a performance on-par with Black Swan). Changing Jane Foster's back-story probably added to the character, provided you buy into the fact she is an astrophysicist. Hopkins was solid and barely distinguishable as Odin (in a good sense). Ironically, Heimdall, the character the fanboys bitched about the most, was one of the better supporting characters. Apparently they cut 15 mins very late in production -- maybe that wasn't such a good idea, because it felt a bit rushed and some of the stuff could have been fleshed out. In fact, I feel it would have greatly benefited from at least one sequel. Two other "non-Thor" Marvel universe characters make an appearance; one during the film and one after the credits. The scene after the credits is important in the context of the plot and foreshadowing the Avengers movie. In other words, you must watch it. A word about the 3D: it seemed pretty superflous to me. If you can't get to a 3D cinema or don't want to shell-out the extra $$$, don't fret cos I don't think you'll miss much. All in all, better than Iron-Man 2 and The Incredible Hulk, on par with the first Iron Man. It's better than what my criticisms make-out, if you take it for what it is. For that, I'll give it 7.5/10.

Benjamin Grimm May 07 2011 04:27 AM Re: Thor (2011)

Saw it last night, and I enjoyed it. I have to think, however, that if I didn't have a life-long affection for the Marvel characters, I would have thought it pretty silly. Had one near-goosebump moment, when (and this isn't a spoiler) Thor gets reunited with his hammer. Some of the characters were very well cast: Odin, Fandral, and Loki looked like they stepped right off the comics page. Volstagg, not so much. The after-the-credits scene left me a bit confused. I got the character-driven part, but not the one related to the object.

The Second Spitter May 07 2011 04:59 AM Re: Thor (2011)

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Saw it last night, and I enjoyed it. I have to think, however, that if I didn't have a life-long affection for the Marvel characters, I would have thought it pretty silly. Had one near-goosebump moment, when (and this isn't a spoiler) Thor gets reunited with his hammer. Some of the characters were very well cast: Odin, Fandral, and Loki looked like they stepped right off the comics page. Volstagg, not so much. The after-the-credits scene left me a bit confused. I got the character-driven part, but not the one related to the object. Unfortunately, I dont think there were enough near goosebump moments....I wanted to see Thor really struggle a lot more as a mere mortal. As for the ending I had no idea what the object was either but in relation to Loki controlling Erik, it was a piss-poor attempt at being ambiguous, not good drama. Wanted to ask you, is the character of Erik Selvig a Marvel character of some importance?

Benjamin Grimm May 07 2011 06:06 AM Re: Thor (2011)

I've never heard of him, but my in-depth knowledge of the Marvel universe is fuzzy for the last couple of decades. I'm much better on the earlier stuff, so perhaps he's a more recent character. I voted OKC, by the way, without knowing what it meant. Oklahoma City?

The Second Spitter May 07 2011 06:23 AM Re: Thor (2011)

Yeah, as in their NBA franchise OKC Thunder who are doing well in the playoffs, and also denoting that the movie is "okay, see it." (I know, my movie poll selections tend to border on the ridiculous)

SteveJRogers May 07 2011 04:54 PM Re: Thor (2011)

I took it that the bit at the end is foreshadowing July's Captain America as the object in question will be a major part of that film.

cooby May 07 2011 08:23 PM Re: Thor (2011)

Saw it tonight, loved it!

Benjamin Grimm May 07 2011 08:36 PM Re: Thor (2011)

Internet buzz says it's the Cosmic Cube, though I noticed nothing cube-like in that box. I'll have to look for a screen shot online so I can take a fresh look.

metirish May 09 2011 07:17 AM Re: Thor (2011)

Raked in $66 million over the weekend .....

Edgy MD May 12 2011 09:11 PM Re: Thor (2011)

So, if I remember the history of this character right, Thor origingally wasn't really THOR Thor, but a doctor who finds the hammer and becomes endowed with the power of the deity. As the character evolves, he starts talking fruity, making Norse references, and running afoul of Loki, while other characters from Norse pantheon start making appearances. The editors realized that they had gradually changed the character from a mortal who got lucky to the god himself, so they came up with this explanation that he was always Thor, but was walking the earth in some magic amnesiac exile, and when it was time for him to re-awaken, a spell he placed on the hammer would summon him to find it and reclaim his destiny. Something like that, right? Do I have it right at all? And is that sort of what's going on in the movie? That Blake isn't doesn't kow he's really the guy until a switch goes on and reminds him?

Benjamin Grimm May 13 2011 04:07 AM Re: Thor (2011)

That's pretty much how it went in the early comics. The movie, fortunately, went a different direction. Thor got banished from Asgard, but was always aware that he was Thor.

Edgy MD May 14 2011 07:05 PM Re: Thor (2011)

Didn't make much sense to me. I don't know what happens to me, but a lot of times in sci-fi/fantasy, we get to the climax, and I have no idea what's going on. I mean I know who the good guy and the bad guy are but I don't understand what they're doing and why. I'm gonig to make a great old man. -- Huh? Wha'? -- Quiet, grandpa!

Edgy MD May 14 2011 07:40 PM Re: Thor (2011)

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Internet buzz says it's the Cosmic Cube, though I noticed nothing cube-like in that box. I'll have to look for a screen shot online so I can take a fresh look. I thought it was funny to see Samuel L. Jackson walking around with a glowing mysterious thing in a briefcase again.

SteveJRogers May 15 2011 07:36 AM Re: Thor (2011)

Edgy DC wrote: Didn't make much sense to me. I don't know what happens to me, but a lot of times in sci-fi/fantasy, we get to the climax, and I have no idea what's going on. I mean I know who the good guy and the bad guy are but I don't understand what they're doing and why. I'm gonig to make a great old man. -- Huh? Wha'? -- Quiet, grandpa! Sounds like that bit Seinfeld did on his show about people always asking questions while watching movies "(in a hushed tone) What? Why did they kill him, I thought he was with them? OH, he WAS'NT with them. Oh, so it's good that they killed him."

Frayed Knot May 15 2011 07:47 AM Re: Thor (2011)

Edgy DC wrote: Didn't make much sense to me. I don't know what happens to me, but a lot of times in sci-fi/fantasy, we get to the climax, and I have no idea what's going on. I mean I know who the good guy and the bad guy are but I don't understand what they're doing and why. I was like that on whichever one of the Batman movies I saw (the Heath Ledger one - I have no idea what it was called).

sharpie May 16 2011 09:27 AM Re: Thor (2011)

I'm with Edgy and Frayed on this. The other thing, for me, about these movies is that when I know it's a franchise film and you know how it has to end then I feel all the tension is gone. Batman/Iron Man/Thor isn't going to get killed by these bad guys nor, in most cases, is the bad guy going to get killed because we may need them in a future installment of the franchise and they have to have some fealty to the comic book.

dgwphotography Jun 14 2011 09:27 AM Re: Thor (2011)

I finally saw this Saturday night, and thoroughly enjoyed it. I agree completely regarding Loki - he was easily the most dynamic character in the movie, but he just reminded me of Jeff Wilpon too much... I must admit to really looking forward to Captain America next month...

Edgy MD Jun 14 2011 07:44 PM Re: Thor (2011)

The Second Spitter wrote: I was mostly indifferent to Portman's performance. Her character was probably the most underdeveloped of any on screen. If their intention was to create a "plain Jane" character then it worked. But other than that, she looked good and delivered her lines efficiently. (Just don't expect a performance on-par with Black Swan). Changing Jane Foster's back-story probably added to the character, provided you buy into the fact she is an astrophysicist. If she's a plain Jane, why does she wear all her makeup to bed? Why is she walking around with nasty hair extensions and seemingly eyelash extensions as well? She's as much a glamour puss as they come.

TransMonk Sep 18 2011 10:09 AM Re: Thor (2011)

Edgy DC wrote: Didn't make much sense to me. I don't know what happens to me, but a lot of times in sci-fi/fantasy, we get to the climax, and I have no idea what's going on. I mean I know who the good guy and the bad guy are but I don't understand what they're doing and why. I'm gonig to make a great old man. This.

Ceetar Oct 11 2011 08:18 AM Re: Thor (2011)

Finally saw it last night. (captain America I guess needs to be on tap..) I enjoyed it. Although most of my comic book history is fuzzy, because I didn't read that many of them. I always tell myself I'm going to grab some and read up on them, but I never know where to start, so most of my Marvel stuff I know is off of PS3 and Marvel Ultimate Alliance (great games btw. lots of fun)

Nymr83 Jul 09 2012 07:14 PM Re: Thor (2011)

not really sure where to go with this one ona poll with 6 choices, i went 3rd from the top which i take to be 3 stars, 3.5 stars if we had that function