Thor 2 news, speculation and pictures possible Spoilers

[cherokeesam]

Branagh needs to abandon that "signature" (or better yet that DP). As for why he doesn't fall into the A-list or visionary categories, well, he started strong with Henry V, and had a few moments afterwards (Hamlet) but never really continued to evolve with his directing. Great directors just get better with time, to the point where the mere announcement of a new project is praised by the community. Branagh's films steadily declined through the 90s. In other news, went back and watched Jenkins' MONSTER again. Hadn't seen it since '03. Solid film. It'd be great if Jenkins brought Theron into the Thor world. She'd make a great villain. If there's one thing Jenkins has that can do us some good, is that she clearly knows how to get alot out of her actors. She pushed Theron & Ricci to some really dark places. Problem is, Marvel's family-friendly approach might handicap her. Here's hoping they go all out with this one and relinquish the "fun" agenda in favor of something more compelling.

I'm wondering now if Marvel is approaching Jenkins *just* for that --- to try to get an "in" with Charlize. If they're casting for Enchantress, I'm sure Charlize is high on Marvel Studios' wishlist, same as she is with a lot of other fan wishlists for that role that I've seen on the Interwebz.

[Gamma Burst]

I said some here would be deeply annoyed by such 'heresy''. LOL.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Cherokeesam, I would love to see Theron play Enchantress. And yeah, the Jenkins/Theron re-team would probably take things up a notch.

[BobbyCorwin88]

I said some here would be deeply annoyed by such 'heresy''. LOL.
Nah, I'm just genuinely curious. It's rare that I ever see anything but praise when it comes to TDK, which I feel it deserves, but if he's got something to say otherwise I'd like to hear it.

[Son of Coul]

Apparently fun =/= compelling. You learn something new every day.

[Whiskey Tango]

And this is why when I see a post attached to your name I skip it.

But you couldn't have quoted it if you skipped it, sweetcakes. And I could give a **** if you skip them or not.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Nah, I'm just genuinely curious. It's rare that I ever see anything but praise when it comes to TDK, which I feel it deserves, but if he's got something to say otherwise I'd like to hear it.You see DRIVE yet, Bobby? If Nick Refn ever gets his hands on a CBM, the sun will go into supernova. DRIVE is such a triumph.

[Gamma Burst]

Apparently fun =/= compelling. You learn something new every day.

For example, I learned that every cbm should be directed by [/i]artsy[/i] directors. That makes them instantly awesome!

[BobbyCorwin88]

I'm wondering now if Marvel is approaching Jenkins *just* for that --- to try to get an "in" with Charlize. If they're casting for Enchantress, I'm sure Charlize is high on Marvel Studios' wishlist, same as she is with a lot of other fan wishlists for that role that I've seen on the Interwebz.

Cherokeesam, I would love to see Theron play Enchantress. And yeah, the Jenkins/Theron re-team would probably take things up a notch.
Man. How can I put this...

I haven't seen Monster, but I know what it's all about. I'm perfectly aware that it has some very stellar performances and excellent direction, but the problem I have with films like Monster is that they tend to dive into really dark places that I'm simply not willing to follow. Call me old fashioned, I just can't take that much sex, violence, drug abuse, etc. and not get disgusted. It's simply not for me. I've probably missed out on a lot of genuinely good films for taking that stance, and I'm perfectly aware of that, but when it comes down to it, there's just some things I simply don't care to digest; certain themes I really don't want to explore. All this and I'm a film student! Weird..

That being said, if that same kind of passion and attention can be directed to a product that comes from a comic book and illicit the same response that seems to follow these films, then I say go for it. I feel like we've seen what that kind of direction can do already with films like Iron Man, First Class and TDK and now I really want to see it taken to the next level.

If we look at the directors for those 3 films, we'd probably see that Favreou is the most "family friendly" so to speak, so delving into this territory didn't seem especially hard for him. The right kind of direction and attention was given to Tony Stark and it obviously resonated extremely well with die hard fans and the GA. Now take Vaughn and Nolan, both noted for tackling more mature and visceral content in previous films, all of which have been genuinely well received. Obviously they had to hold back a little bit to keep things PG-13, but they did it in a way that still held true to their directing styles and managed to put out a great, mature product that received that attention I've been talking about.

So herein lies my fear with Jenkins. Would she be willing to hold back a bit under Marvel Studios with Disney hovering in the background? My thought is that it might scare some directors such as herself away from these kinds of projects. Thor is definitely worthy of talent such as hers, but when you get to direct films with an "anything goes" attitude such as she's done, will she really be willing to hold back? Even though at its very worst, Thor has the potential to be excessively violent, but I really don't think they'd push it to "R" territory.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Bobby, you can handle MONSTER. SALO on the other hand...better stay away from that one, broski. But I'm equally worried about where this Jenkins thing goes. If they get her, will they let her work? Or will she be forced to follow the Feige mandate? I really miss the days of the first Iron Man, where Favreau had complete control - hence the AWESOME film we got.

[Chewy]

I'm wondering now if Marvel is approaching Jenkins *just* for that --- to try to get an "in" with Charlize. If they're casting for Enchantress, I'm sure Charlize is high on Marvel Studios' wishlist, same as she is with a lot of other fan wishlists for that role that I've seen on the Interwebz.
They already have an "in" with Theron.

http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/2900/comicconsnowwhitehuntsm.jpg

This could explain why Hems took that Snow White role :oldrazz:

[Alexei Belyakov]

For example, I learned that every cbm should be directed by artsy directors. That makes them instantly awesome! There are so many things wrong with this statement, I don't even know where to begin. I mean, to actually go as far and knock the demand for real visionaries to helm these films, I just don't know how to react to that. Its like wanting to get a tattoo from a blind tattoo artist.

[The Morningstar]

Wait, so you think the Gladiator rip-off scene where Loki & Odin argue belongs in an Oscar movie but TDK is a heartless, soulless, cold & sterile film? Really? Because if you really think that way, then I strongly suggest you avoid anything that sweeps film festivals or makes top 10 lists. There's nothing wrong with preferring popcorn over quality, but it pretty much puts us at opposing sides when discussing film. I want an intelligent Thor movie. I don't want another "fun" vehicle. Branagh's Thor was the epitome of uninspired summer fare. That is what I consider soulless & sterile. And this is why when I see a post attached to your name I skip it.

Don't get pretentious with me. I follow the film festivals and all that. TDK belongs no where near them. TDK isn't an intelligent film. It thinks it is sure, but it isn't. It treats it's audience like idiots with it's ham fisted and subtle as a sledgehammer "themes". ****, it even breaks the fourth wall at the end with Gordon's spoon feeding monologue explaining the entire film for all the idiots in the audience.

And no, it has no emotion. It's sterile and soulless. It wallows in it's own self importance and nihilism. And above all, it isn't that fun to watch. Which I don't mind as long as it's compelling, but after multiple viewings i find it's efforts at being this super serious crime movie and a movie about a guy who dresses like a bat pretty laughable. Especially when you then throw in the, like i said, subtle as a sledgehammer to the knee caps socio political themes and what not. Which to me just scream "PLEASE TAKE ME SERIOUSLY! WE DON'T LIKE FUN!" Plus none of the characters speak like real human beings. It's like they are exposition machines who trot out these unnatural, overwraught monologues at random.

Thor is a flawed film. More flawed than TDK on a technical level. But it is much more heartfelt and entertaining. And yes, the Loki vs Odin scene is a brilliantly acted and written scene. It is more emotionally powerful than anything in the sterile TDK.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Morningstar, I watched TDK at a press screening here in Chicago a week before release. There were at least a dozen critics sitting in my row, all of them with their little notepads ready to make notes. When Gary Oldman finished his spoon-feeding speech & the screen went black, 2 of them got up & applauded, which induced applause from everyone else in the room. TDK isn't just an amazing comic book movie. Its a brilliant crime drama. It wasn't trying to cater to the bat-fans or the Nolan fans or the summer popcorn crowd. It was a film anyone with taste could enjoy & one that would even keep the popcorn crowds from walking out. The writing, the cinematography, the superb performance by Ledger...its a VERY hard movie to dismiss. As for the Odin/Loki scene in Thor, there's a movie called GLADIATOR (2000) & in this movie there's a scene where Marcus Aurelius finally confronts his son about his true nature. The scene in Thor is a poor man's version of that scene. There was nothing brilliant [or original] about it.

[herolee10]

Morningstar, I watched TDK at a press screening here in Chicago a week before release. There were at least a dozen critics sitting in my row, all of them with their little notepads ready to make notes. When Gary Oldman finished his spoon-feeding speech & the screen went black, 2 of them got up & applauded, which induced applause from everyone else in the room. TDK isn't just an amazing comic book movie. Its a brilliant crime drama. It wasn't trying to cater to the bat-fans or the Nolan fans or the summer popcorn crowd. It was a film anyone with taste could enjoy & one that would even keep the popcorn crowds from walking out. The writing, the cinematography, the superb performance by Ledger...its a VERY hard movie to dismiss. As for the Odin/Loki scene in Thor, there's a movie called GLADIATOR (2000) & in this movie there's a scene where Marcus Aurelius finally confronts his son about his true nature. The scene in Thor is a poor man's version of that scene. There was nothing brilliant [or original] about it.

Several others would disagree with you there. As great as TDK was, there were elements in its plot that I wouldn't call "entirely" original as I've seen it elsewhere.

Heck, a lot of films, as great as they are, borrow elements from previous and well told stories, and that's just the art of storytelling.

It's your opinion to think what you will, but don't try to insinuate that your opinion is the ONLY one that matters here.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Herolee, go watch Gladiator and then see if you can still agree with that last post you wrote. Its one thing to have influences from other movies/styles, Tarantino made a brilliant career out of that, but to downright rip off a great scene from a great movie and reduce it to nothing more than a shorter, more generic version of it - is just lame. Joaquin Phoenix basically got his Oscar Nomination because of that scene.

[herolee10]

Herolee, go watch Gladiator and then see if you can still agree with that last post you wrote. Its one thing to have influences from other movies/styles, Tarantino made a brilliant career out of that, but to downright rip off a great scene from a great movie and reduce it to nothing more than a shorter, more generic version of it - is just lame. Joaquin Phoenix basically got his Oscar Nomination because of that scene.

I have seen it, and granted, while there are similarities, I truly believe that Tom and Anthony made it work for me.

The whole point of the confrontation between Loki and Odin imho, was to show audiences on where Loki came from and how that information would trigger his tragic downfall in the end, and Tom really made me believe in Loki's anguish in that scene, and I'm not the only one..and no, it's not because fans and I have lower standards, so don't think that, it's because fans such as myself can appreciate such scenes for what its worth.

What's worthless and lame to one person, can at times be the other way around for other people.

[The Morningstar]

Morningstar, I watched TDK at a press screening here in Chicago a week before release. There were at least a dozen critics sitting in my row, all of them with their little notepads ready to make notes. When Gary Oldman finished his spoon-feeding speech & the screen went black, 2 of them got up & applauded, which induced applause from everyone else in the room. TDK isn't just an amazing comic book movie. Its a brilliant crime drama. It wasn't trying to cater to the bat-fans or the Nolan fans or the summer popcorn crowd. It was a film anyone with taste could enjoy & one that would even keep the popcorn crowds from walking out. The writing, the cinematography, the superb performance by Ledger...its a VERY hard movie to dismiss. As for the Odin/Loki scene in Thor, there's a movie called GLADIATOR (2000) & in this movie there's a scene where Marcus Aurelius finally confronts his son about his true nature. The scene in Thor is a poor man's version of that scene. There was nothing brilliant [or original] about it.

I don't give a crap what the critics thought. The monologue at the end is an amazing example of the rule "show, don't tell" being broken. The whole film is guilty of it. Real people do not speak like that... especially to their 6 year old sons (as Gordon was in that scene). It was basically breaking the fourth wall explaining the movie for the idiots in the audience.

You talk about originality? A lot of stuff in TDK wasn't original. Joker's speech about knives is about as cliche as it gets, for example. But it's all about the execution, and Ledger executed that scene brilliantly.

Just as Hiddleston and Hopkins executed their scene brilliantly.

But anyway, don't want to carry this on. All I'll say is that TDK is emotionally empty, self important and sterile. Thor whilst a flawed film, is heartfelt and charming, that is why it is so well liked despite it's flaws.

[herolee10]

Anyways, in regards to this film; I want to see Thor and the Warriors Three/Sif go on a Journey/Adventure throughout the nine realms..something similar to what was shown in the Fellowship of the ring.

I want to see Thor interact with multiple inhabitants of the Nine realms and see him save a lot of innocent people as well instead of just Frost Giants and people in New Mexico.lol

[Alexei Belyakov]

Loki's reveal as a Frost Giant, the way he confronted Odin about it, didn't need to result in the Odin-sleep. Also, Loki's very loud & emotional reaction to the truth of his origin was again, almost a word-by-word replay of Commodus' reaction, only shorter and less creepy. Branagh probably felt 11 years was enough time for people to forget about Gladiator, specially since the target demographic for this film with its 3D format was ages 5-17 (a group who were too young to have seen Gladiator). While the majority of the hardcore fans probably exceed that age range, the majority of Thor's money was being expected to come from that target demographic. I noticed it right away as did many critics who cited it in their reviews as one of many weak elements in the film. The sad thing is that for said demographic, the Loki/Odin scene is the original and were they ever to watch Gladiator, the impact of Marcus Aurelius' guilt/death to Commodus would be reduced greatly.

[Gamma Burst]

There are so many things wrong with this statement, I don't even know where to begin. I mean, to actually go as far and knock the demand for real visionaries to helm these films, I just don't know how to react to that. Its like wanting to get a tattoo from a blind tattoo artist.

I'm not knocking anything. I want great movies as much as anyone who enjoys these characters do.
What I find funny (and quite pathetic) is how one defines what a true, real visionary is, and how one takes as a fact that everything touched by such 'geniuses' instantly turns into gold. This is silly and pretentious, considering the subjective nature of cinema as an art form.However it's an expected behaviour from pseudo-intellectuals, whom are unfortunately too common these days, specially in message boards.

[BigThor]

I don't know much about Patty Jenkins, do you all think she'll be able to handle giving us some action scenes in Thor 2?

[R_Hythlodeus]

are action scenes important? I'd rather watch a movie with good characterisation and dramatic dialogue, than a movie like TF.
I know that those are genre movies and action scenes are part of that, but I'd prefer if there is more emphasis on the not-action scenes.

[04nbod]

Ok if this is going to be a road movie, Darcy has to come along. I want to see her and Fandral use and abuse each other. :p

are action scenes important? I'd rather watch a movie with good characterisation and dramatic dialogue, than a movie like TF.
I know that those are genre movies and action scenes are part of that, but I'd prefer if there is more emphasis on the not-action scenes.


The villain has to bring character out in our hero, like Loki in the first one. That is why I want Enchantress and Executioner. Some of Thor's villains are just there to be punched and that is not enough for me.

[Alexei Belyakov]

What I find funny (& quite pathetic) is how one defines what a true, real visionary is, & how one takes as a fact that everything touched by such 'geniuses' instantly turns into gold. This is silly & pretentious, considering the subjective nature of cinema as an art form.In other words, you don't care if brilliant directors make brilliant movies or if Marvel does not approach them to make their movies because you think they're "artsy" & questionable. Frankly, most people who brand visionaries as "artsy" are people who know little about their films (or about the art-form). You're entitled to dismiss real movies & defend popcorn movies. You're entitled to downtalk the "geniuses" & call those who respect them "pathetic". In the end, it really doesn't matter. They shall continue to truly push this medium, while popcorn movies will just slowly fade out of their latest gimmick (CBMs) & take a new form - unless more TDKs, X2s, SM2s & First Classes are made (by geniuses). Irony.

[Gamma Burst]

In other words, you don't care if brilliant directors make brilliant movies or if Marvel does not approach them to make their movies because you think they're "artsy" & questionable. Frankly, most people who brand visionaries as "artsy" are people who know little about their films (or about the art-form). You're entitled to dismiss real movies & defend popcorn movies. You're entitled to downtalk the "geniuses" & call those who respect them "pathetic". In the end, it really doesn't matter. They shall continue to truly push this medium, while popcorn movies will just slowly fade out of their latest gimmick (CBMs) & take a new form - unless more TDKs, X2s, SM2s & First Classes are made (by geniuses). Irony.

This last post proves you didn't read my post or deliberately chose to twist it so that suits you better. It is really sad.
There's no point in arguing with you anyway since you just repeat the same lines in every.

[Vartha]

Posted pics of the Costume helmet and Mjolnir, plus the mjolnir kingring
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=338879&page=3

[R_Hythlodeus]

Bobby, you can handle MONSTER. SALO on the other hand...better stay away from that one, broski. But I'm equally worried about where this Jenkins thing goes. If they get her, will they let her work? Or will she be forced to follow the Feige mandate? I really miss the days of the first Iron Man, where Favreau had complete control - hence the AWESOME film we got.
WAIT! You're honestly thinking Favreau had more creative control in IM than in the sequel? Or more creative control than Johnston and Branagh?
It was the "Feige mandate" that gave us the first IM, you know? He had his hands in this too...

[Alexei Belyakov]

WAIT! You're honestly thinking Favreau had more creative control in IM than in the sequel? Or more creative control than Johnston & Branagh?
It was the "Feige mandate" that gave us the first IM, you know? He had his hands in this too...No, Avi Arad brought in Favreau & gave him creative control over every aspect of the film. There was no Feige interference during production or during post. Same goes for TIH. It was after TIH was shot that Feige began to interfere with the filmmakers. He re-cut Norton & Leterrier's final TIH print & then micro-managed Favreau all throughout the IM2 shoot (which led Favreau to grow tired of Marvel). With Thor & Cap, Feige had the most to contribute - hence the sloppy products we got. Iron Man was Favreau's & Favreau's alone. That's why its such a great movie. Favs is a really creative guy. His personal approach to film is "anti-studio" which had a huge influence on IM's anti-popcorn formula. Feige on the other hand, embraces popcorn.

[R_Hythlodeus]

Favreau never grew tired with Marvel, as far as I know he's still coming back as Happy for IM 3 and is still one of the producers of the Avengers.

And I wonder where all the hatred for popcorn comes from. It's a delicious snack. No wonder Feige embraces it. Well, sure, there are other meals which are healthier, but every now and then, and especially in the cinema, I like my popcorn and my soft drink.

[BobbyCorwin88]

are action scenes important? I'd rather watch a movie with good characterisation and dramatic dialogue, than a movie like TF.
I know that those are genre movies and action scenes are part of that, but I'd prefer if there is more emphasis on the not-action scenes.
I think they're important when it comes to characters like Thor. A very big part of who Thor is, is action. He's a warrior and he embraces that side of himself completely. It should definitely reflect in well directed action scenes. If you look at characters like Spider-Man or some of the X-Men, I don't think the same rule applies. They don't live and breathe combat like Thor does, so insane action scenes shouldn't be what we focus on with them.

I'm not saying that we need to throw all our focus onto Thor's action scenes, but they're definitely a big part of who he is so they should be represented well.

As far as that Faverou argument goes, did anyone other than me love the heck out of Cowboys and Aliens?

[BigThor]

are action scenes important? I'd rather watch a movie with good characterisation and dramatic dialogue, than a movie like TF.
I know that those are genre movies and action scenes are part of that, but I'd prefer if there is more emphasis on the not-action scenes.

Yes they are very important, who wants to see a Thor film where he just wonders around the 9 realms talking to people?

The first film had good characterisation so that's pretty much guaranteed, I don't see how you can't have a film with good characterisation and awesome action scenes.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Favreau never grew tired with Marvel, as far as I know he's still coming back as Happy for IM 3 and is still one of the producers of the Avengers.You really think Favreau never grew tired of Marvel? The man walked away from the billion-dollar franchise HE built and turned down the opportunity to helm a $200 Million movie. Some directors never even get the chance to make movies that expensive. Making a cameo as RDJ's driver & getting "Executive Producer" credit on The Avengers doesn't mean Favreau is crazy about Marvel. Favreau has always been very open about his disdain for talent-less suits that meddle in the creative process just because they control the money. Unfortunately the majority of Hollywood producers suffer from that disease. You should watch Dinner for Five. It'll give you a real idea of where Favreau stands in the politics of the business and it'll also offer you further insight into his creative prowess. I own all the seasons. Great stuff.

[BigThor]

I think they're important when it comes to characters like Thor. A very big part of who Thor is, is action. He's a warrior and he embraces that side of himself completely. It should definitely reflect in well directed action scenes. If you look at characters like Spider-Man or some of the X-Men, I don't think the same rule applies. They don't live and breathe combat like Thor does, so insane action scenes shouldn't be what we focus on with them.

I'm not saying that we need to throw all our focus onto Thor's action scenes, but they're definitely a big part of who he is so they should be represented well.

Exactly, I agree 100% :up:

[Alexei Belyakov]

did anyone other than me love the heck out of Cowboys & Aliens?Bob, like Zathura, it was a miss. He was trying to recapture the magic of sci-fi "B" movie gems like Aliens & Westworld, but failed to pull it off. I love me some Harrison Ford & I'll watch anything Sam Rockwell's in, but Craig didn't belong in the movie. Favreau thought there was a Steve McQueen/Nevada Smith vibe to him but he was way off. I like to tell people that Cowboys & Aliens is the anti-Super 8. And that's not a good thing.

[BobbyCorwin88]

Bob, like Zathura, it was a miss. He was trying to recapture the magic of sci-fi "B" movie gems like Aliens & Westworld, but failed to pull it off. I love me some Harrison Ford & I'll watch anything Sam Rockwell's in, but Craig didn't belong in the movie. Favreau thought there was a Steve McQueen/Nevada Smith vibe to him but he was way off. I like to tell people that Cowboys & Aliens is the anti-Super 8. And that's not a good thing.
Haha. I think that's exactly why I love it so much. I kind of wish he would have left Craig's communication to nothing but punching. He and Ford basically had a small conversation just by hitting each other. I just eat the heck out of that crap. His accent was terrible, but God love him he's a great Bond. His name "Daniel Craig" is my dad's first and middle name.

Super 8 was sweet. I think it and X-Men were my favorite films this summer, out of the one's I've seen anyway.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Super 8 was sweet. I think it and X-Men were my favorite films this summer, out of the one's I've seen anyway.I love Abrams & I'm thrilled that he's finally moving forward with Star Trek 2. Well, this is the best of 2011 for me in order as follows: #1. Drive. #2. The Tree of Life. #3. Melancholia. #4. Take Shelter. #5. X-Men First Class. #6. The Skin I Live in. #7. The Last Circus. #8. Midnight in Paris. #9. Rise of The Planet of The Apes. #10. Super 8. I'm pretty sure the bottom four will get knocked down once I see The Rum Diary, Fincher's The Girl with The Dragon Tattoo, A Dangerous Method & Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy.

[Crimson King]

No, Avi Arad brought in Favreau & gave him creative control over every aspect of the film. There was no Feige interference during production or during post. Same goes for TIH. It was after TIH was shot that Feige began to interfere with the filmmakers. He re-cut Norton & Leterrier's final TIH print & then micro-managed Favreau all throughout the IM2 shoot (which led Favreau to grow tired of Marvel). With Thor & Cap, Feige had the most to contribute - hence the sloppy products we got. Iron Man was Favreau's & Favreau's alone. That's why its such a great movie. Favs is a really creative guy. His personal approach to film is "anti-studio" which had a huge influence on IM's anti-popcorn formula. Feige on the other hand, embraces popcorn.

You should listen to the directors in their interviews. It would help to correct a lot of the inaccuracies you've listed here. I've pointed you to one with Branagh before and you ignored it because it didn't fit your version of the facts.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

After finally getting to watch the BD at home today, I really am gutted Branagh isnt coming back, I thought he brought a sense of fun to the first movie that made it really enjoyable along with the excellent acting and characterisation.

The directors being mouted for Thor 2 so far havent impressed me in the slightest and I worry about what type of sequel we will get. Iron Man 2 was a huge step down from the first movie, I am worried we will get the same here.

[Nave 'Torment']

It really gets difficult to follow discussions on this thread :)

Crooked shots.

Could you explain this a little more? I'm really, really lost here. Send me a PM if it's better.

You should want both. You shouldn't just settle for one thing when you can get more.

Thor did have meaningful and compelling moments. Mainly involving Odin and his sons. The scene where Loki confronts Odin about his origin for example. Wouldn't look out of place in some Oscar bait period drama. Also the scene where Loki visits Thor on Earth and lies to him about his fathers death and his mother not wanting him back. Or when Thor fails to lift Mjolnir, the camera pans away and we see the SHIELD complex reflected in Heimdall's eye. That was really cool.

Powerful, emotional moments. In fact i'd say those character moments were the main draw of the film for me. More so than the action.

The thing with most of Marvels movies is that they all have heart and genuine emotion. They have those genuinely emotional moments that make the movies likable and charming. Whereas you look at other superhero movies like Green Lantern and even The Dark Knight, they are sterile, soulless. TDK might have all these deep meanings and the excruciatingly obvious spoon fed socio political themes etc but frankly, it's heartless, it's soulless, it's cold and sterile. It just isn't fun. It wallows in it's own nihilism.

Very strong post there. I agree, even for me it was teh character rather than the action, and I think that's where Branagh excels in. That's also one of the reasons why I'm not being skeptical of Patty Jenkins as the new director. Those scenes you described are still perhaps some of the most memorable ones from the film/summer so yeah. Thor was more than just a summer flick, and I'm not just saying this as a comix-fanboy /spokesperson of geek culture here either, it was the kind of movie that, after all the complex ideas and themes, strove to wrap the entire thing in a neat way so as to create this illusion of simplicity. And I think it's brilliant. It's really not unlike actual works of myths on their own. Or fables for that matter. TDK had it's share of strong emotions, the only sterile person was Batman so **** you (:p) But yeah, this one, Thor, is a completely different kind of superhero-on-film.

Heck, the fact that audiences went into Asgard and immediately felt at home with the likes of Thor, Odin, Loki, Sif, Frigga and the Warriors 3 says something about the craft at work.

[Alexei Belyakov]

You should listen to the directors in their interviews. It would help to correct a lot of the inaccuracies you've listed here. I've pointed you to one with Branagh before & you ignored it because it didn't fit your version of the facts. This shows just how little you know about the business. In Hollywood there's a Golden rule: "Never burn bridges." You just don't do it. Even if you're coming off a terrible ordeal. You'll never hear Hugh Jackman admit just how terrible Origins was. You'll never hear Sam Raimi's true feelings on his treatment by the suits during SM3. You'll never hear Favreau or Branagh or Johnston or Leterrier speak negatively about Feige. You have to learn to read between the lines, or just wait for the next interview where Chris Evans basically calls the Marvel movies crap he only does for money. Now there's a guy that doesn't know how to be subtle. But look, if you wanna live in the fairy tale world where Feige is a credit to this medium, go ahead.

[R_Hythlodeus]

This shows just how little you know about the business. In Hollywood there's a Golden rule: "Never burn bridges." You just don't do it. Even if you're coming off a terrible ordeal. You'll never hear Hugh Jackman admit just how terrible Origins was. You'll never hear Sam Raimi's true feelings on his treatment by the suits during SM3. You'll never hear Favreau or Branagh or Johnston or Leterrier speak negatively about Feige. You have to learn to read between the lines, or just wait for the next interview where Chris Evans basically calls the Marvel movies crap he only does for money. Now there's a guy that doesn't know how to be subtle. But look, if you wanna live in the fairy tale world where Feige is a credit to this medium, go ahead.
so what you say is basically, just believe whatever you want to believe even if evidence suggests the opposite because everyone is lying if it doesn't fit your point of view?

[Alexei Belyakov]

so what you say is basically, just believe whatever you want to believe even if evidence suggests the opposite because everyone is lying if it doesn't fit your point of view?Again, if you know anything about this business, its that you don't go around trash-talking your peers. If Favs were to come out & tarnish Feige's image, he'd have a tough time getting work afterwards. Mickey Rourke's career was ended the moment he told Samuel Goldwyn to go **** himself. Charlie Sheen got canned from his show after calling out his boss. In Hollywood, if you experience something bad, you keep it to yourself. When asked about it you do your best to be diplomatic. Favreau's done a good job keeping quiet, but there's been enough people that worked on IM2 that haven't been as subtle & have opened up about the endless "suggestions" Feige had while on-set. The irony is, that just watching a fluff interview with Feige (where 99% of it is scripted) you can still tell he's a moron.

[R_Hythlodeus]

Again, if you know anything about this business, its that you don't go around trash-talking your peers. If Favs were to come out & tarnish Feige's image, he'd have a tough time getting work afterwards. Mickey Rourke's career was ended the moment he told Samuel Goldwyn to go **** himself. Charlie Sheen got canned from his show after calling out his boss. In Hollywood, if you experience something bad, you keep it to yourself. When asked about it you do your best to be diplomatic. Favreau's done a good job keeping quiet, but there's been enough people that worked on IM2 that haven't been as subtle & have opened up about the endless "suggestions" Feige had while on-set. The irony is, that just watching a fluff interview with Feige (where 99% of it is scripted) you can still tell he's a moron.
That doesn't answer my question, really.

[Crimson King]

but there's been enough people that worked on IM2 that haven't been as subtle & have opened up about the endless "suggestions" Feige had while on-set.

Could you provide a link to such an interview? I'm genuinely interested.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Could you provide a link to such an interview? I'm genuinely interested.Never said they opened up in interviews (that would seal their fate in the business as well). But nevertheless, the internet is your friend (message boards). One of these people actually posts here & had been telling me for years to join this site. She told me an interesting story where Favs & Feige were discussing a shot & the convo got so heated that they walked away from the rest of the crew to talk it out. They came back & Favreau was quiet for the remainder of the day. And there were many of those "convos" between the two during the shoot. Again, when I first heard about stuff like that, I wasn't very surprised because the stuff with Norton & Leterrier had already happened (very publicly). Not to mention the very apparent decline in the quality of the films that began with IM2 & continued throughout Thor & Cap. The guy loves to micro-manage his directors. He has no respect for the talent.

[Whiskey Tango]

Favreau "walked away" so he could make a different zillion dollar movie (Magic Kingdom) for what is essentially the same company (Disney).

But once again Alexei ignores facts that don't support his arguement of the moment.

[marvelrobbins]

When you consider how Feige treated edward Norton Is it hard to believe feige treats
directors bad.I for one haven't forgotten his treatment of Norton.And It Is shame
Norton Isn't Banner In The Avengers.He was perfect as Banner.The Incredible Hulk I
believe Is best Marvel studios film.Just think If Marvel hadn't redit it cutting a lot of character stuff,and trimming origin.The Origin was suspose to be In Flashbacks and they
cut It down to play over opening credits.

X-Men first class came out as it did because fox didn't micromangage as they did on
The Last Stand and wolverine.They give Bryan Singer and Matthew vaughn ability to make good film. Studio Interfence Is factor that lead to the road down In Batman films
quality.Tim Burton wanted to do another film after Batman returns but the studio didn't
because they cared more about selling merchandise.while the studio Is partly to blame
for Spider-Man 3 by Insisting on Venom let's remember other things(Like making Sandman
too sympathic and him as real killer of Ben Parker) were his Ideas that some tend to
forget.Chaarlie Seen was not fired from 2 and a half men because of his personal problems(Studios don't care as long as stars can still make money for them) but because
of his public disputes with the producer.

[sgaana]

Could you explain this a little more? I'm really, really lost here. Send me a PM if it's better.

Nave, the technical term is "Dutch angle". A lot of reviews of "Thor" mentioned it as a Branagh signature. It's where a shot is framed with a slanted horizon.

This website comments on it and posts an early clip from "Thor" that's full of such slanted shots. They're not used exclusively, but compared to most films, Branagh does use them a lot.

http://www.badassdigest.com/2011/03/31/new-thor-footage-full-of-dutch-angles-comedy

[Alexei Belyakov]

Favreau "walked away" so he could make a different zillion dollar movie (Magic Kingdom) for what is essentially the same company (Disney). Sure. You go ahead and keep thinking that ; )

[Whiskey Tango]

That's quite enough out of you, Nancy.

[Alexei Belyakov]

That's quite enough out of you, Nancy.I think that qualifies as a flame.

[Son of Coul]

Guys for real, when you quote Alexei it really defeats the purpose of having him on my ignore list :o

[Whiskey Tango]

This message is hidden because Alexei Belyakov is on your ignore list.

lol I imagine this as a tiny little 2-inch man shaking his fists and screaming in a super high-pitched voice.

[Godzilla2000]

I don't think you guys are happy enough!

[Nave 'Torment']

Nave, the technical term is "Dutch angle". A lot of reviews of "Thor" mentioned it as a Branagh signature. It's where a shot is framed with a slanted horizon.

This website comments on it and posts an early clip from "Thor" that's full of such slanted shots. They're not used exclusively, but compared to most films, Branagh does use them a lot.

http://www.badassdigest.com/2011/03/31/new-thor-footage-full-of-dutch-angles-comedy

Oh I get that. Hmm, does make sense. Personally I had no problems with that angle, it felt okay and seamless to me. There were a few lines that came off as goofy but the rest of the film was brilliantly done. I like how Asgard, with it's heavy CGI doesn't feel CGI even for a second. That has to me commended.

[Dark Raven]

It really gets difficult to follow discussions on this thread :)



Could you explain this a little more? I'm really, really lost here. Send me a PM if it's better.



Have at thee, Nave!!

[Crimson King]

Never said they opened up in interviews (that would seal their fate in the business as well). But nevertheless, the internet is your friend (message boards). One of these people actually posts here & had been telling me for years to join this site. She told me an interesting story where Favs & Feige were discussing a shot & the convo got so heated that they walked away from the rest of the crew to talk it out. They came back & Favreau was quiet for the remainder of the day. And there were many of those "convos" between the two during the shoot. Again, when I first heard about stuff like that, I wasn't very surprised because the stuff with Norton & Leterrier had already happened (very publicly). Not to mention the very apparent decline in the quality of the films that began with IM2 & continued throughout Thor & Cap. The guy loves to micro-manage his directors. He has no respect for the talent.

So you heard a rumor? That seems to be your MO. You hear a rumor and run with it like fact. As naive as you think I am, I think you're just as bad, if not worse, for trumpeting unconfirmed claims as truth. Don't believe everything you hear. True story.

[Vartha]

I don't think you guys are happy enough!
GEE what makes you think that?

OK guys take it easy.

[Vartha]

Nave, the technical term is "Dutch angle". A lot of reviews of "Thor" mentioned it as a Branagh signature. It's where a shot is framed with a slanted horizon.

This website comments on it and posts an early clip from "Thor" that's full of such slanted shots. They're not used exclusively, but compared to most films, Branagh does use them a lot.

http://www.badassdigest.com/2011/03/31/new-thor-footage-full-of-dutch-angles-comedy

Dutch angles don't bother me really. Comic books are FULL of them and Marvel almost requires the artists to use them to create action in non action scenes/pannels.

[Whiskey Tango]

Dutch angles don't bother me really. Comic books are FULL of them and Marvel almost requires the artists to use them to create action in non action scenes/pannels.

I thought it gave the movie a unique feel. I might have reserved them strictly for shots in Asgard, or shots of Loki or whatever but it's nowhere near as distracting as JJ Abrams lens flare. :woot:

For another movie with good use of Dutch angles check out Twelve Monkeys. Terry Gilliam used them to good effect for all the shots set within the sanitariums.

[Godzilla2000]

GEE what makes you think that?

OK guys take it easy.

ximubI-hv9Q

Dutch angles don't bother me really. Comic books are FULL of them and Marvel almost requires the artists to use them to create action in non action scenes/pannels.

At least it wasn't as eyeball grating as they were in Battlefield Earth. :D

[04nbod]

I didn't even notice them. I was too invested in what was happening

[BobbyCorwin88]

It's hard for me not to notice them. Film school, etc....

[marcvader]

That's why it suck to talk cbm's with film school people sometimes.

[BobbyCorwin88]

I guess it's understandable that there would be a disconnect with those who of us who study this stuff, but honestly that's one of the reason's I enrolled (not the main of course, I kinda want to make money). There was a time when I would talk about CBM's or any other nerd-centric movie with blind fandom, only to learn that these so called "film types" didn't feel the same way.

How could this be? These are superheros we're talking about! How could they do any wrong?

A couple of years later, it all makes sense. I used to give these movies a pass because their characters have always been an object of adoration to me, but I simply can't do that anymore. If there's an error in your film on any level, usually, someone who's had schooling in the field is going to notice it and count it against it. Not to say that it always kills the integrity of the film, there's hardly ever been one made that doesn't have a slew of pre, post or production errors. But those in the know understand them and how they effect the film in the long run. It becomes easier to see when bad decisions are made and usually who's responsible for them.

Take Thor for instance. Either Branagh or his DP (Director of Photography) decided that having a majority of their shots be on a cant, or dutch angle, would be a good idea. In film, a dutch angle is implemented, usually, to evoke disorder or disorient the audience in one way or another. You probably notice them a lot in horror movies. So it then makes little sense as to why most of the shots in Thor are shown this way as the story is pretty straightforward and not much "disorder" is present. The reason you use it sparingly is because you don't want that particular effect to last for the entirety of the movie, it's only supposed to evoke a particular feeling when it's relevant. The very first time I saw Thor in theaters, it was almost the only thing I noticed. IMO, it hurt the overall character of the film.

I think it's kind of hard being a comic book and movie fan. You would think the two mix perfectly, but it's not always the case. I'd say only a few have really hit all the right notes and even they have problems. I guess what I'm getting at is try not to get too frustrated with film people when it comes to CBM's. We can't turn it off. =)

[Alexei Belyakov]

Superb post, Bobby. Sadly we're in the minority here because I'd say 90% of people on these forums love the movies because of the characters & could care less if they're terrible movies (just go to the GL threads). From the moment I started posting here I realized very few posters actually care to dissect the films in question. Its a real failure in the concept of online discussion because you have the majority of contributors in the debate defending said questionable films just because they hold the material said films are based on dearly. I for one want my CBMs to be outstanding because I too have a history with these characters. I'll never understand why folks feel they need to give these films a pass. Why condone mediocre products? It only makes brainless producers richer. Watching these films countless times to "support" the character actually prolongs his poor cinematic depiction. Fans should start applying the "blackout" strategy from sports where reduced attendance for games forces teams to improve.

[~fox~]

In film, a dutch angle is implemented, usually, to evoke disorder or disorient the audience in one way or another. You probably notice them a lot in horror movies.


I would venture to say that the majority of the audience in any given movie are NOT future film makers and are not given to picking apart any "fault" in what they are watching. They want to enjoy it...and many people enjoyed Thor.

For me, those angles were about perspective not disorder. When you look at things in a slightly different way than you are used to doing, sometimes you see something in a new way or notice something you never did before.

As for Alexei's comment about giving beloved characters a pass: I am a cbm/ superhero fan, always have been, but I didn't know much about Thor before seeing the movie except he had a hammer, his dad was Odin, and Thursday is in his honor. However, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It is what it is, and I am looking forward to seeing how things develop in the Avengers and Thor 2.

[Crimson King]

Fans should start applying the "blackout" strategy from sports where reduced attendance for games forces teams to improve.

That's already happening. Fans walked away from the abysmal Green Lantern and the end result is that we're not getting another one. Good. Hold off until someone who can write is given the job of scripting the thing.

The opposite is happening with Thor. He had a great box office run, so we'll be seeing more of him in the future. As much as you hated Thor and Cap, you have to admit that your opinion of its quality is in the minority.

[Whiskey Tango]

Clearly everyone who enjoys Marvel Studios films is DOING IT WRONG AND SHOULD STOP IMMEDIATELY.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Superb post, Bobby. Sadly we're in the minority here because I'd say 90% of people on these forums love the movies because of the characters & could care less if they're terrible movies (just go to the GL threads). From the moment I started posting here I realized very few posters actually care to dissect the films in question. Its a real failure in the concept of online discussion because you have the majority of contributors in the debate defending said questionable films just because they hold the material said films are based on dearly. I for one want my CBMs to be outstanding because I too have a history with these characters. I'll never understand why folks feel they need to give these films a pass. Why condone mediocre products? It only makes brainless producers richer. Watching these films countless times to "support" the character actually prolongs his poor cinematic depiction. Fans should start applying the "blackout" strategy from sports where reduced attendance for games forces teams to improve.

Sorry to jump in here, but I dont watch movies to 'dissect' them, I go to the movies to be entertained and taken to another world for 2 hours because I have had a hard day at work, etc, which is exactly what Thor did for me, I find it incredibly entertaining, and even if I watch it 1000 more times it will never be to dissect it.

[Vartha]

ximubI-hv9Q



At least it wasn't as eyeball grating as they were in Battlefield Earth. :D
Dude Dutch angles are better thanthat confusing crap in Ang's Hulk! lol

[BobbyCorwin88]

I would venture to say that the majority of the audience in any given movie are NOT future film makers and are not given to picking apart any "fault" in what they are watching. They want to enjoy it...and many people enjoyed Thor.
Those types, sadly, don't really see superhero movies. They usually think I'm silly for liking them. Believe me, there are a ton of film pricks out there who believe themselves superior and only watch films from the golden age of cinema and find modern film making dull and petty. I hate those guys just as much as anybody because they're just wrong. They know their stuff, sure, but they're pretty narrow-minded when it comes different avenues.

I too want to be entertained when I go to the movies. But that's only going to happen if the makers of the film have invested enough time and effort to make sure I'm going to. Movies like Thor are supposed to appeal to a wide audience, of which I am a part of. I don't think there's a director anywhere in the world who doesn't understand that their movie is going to be picked apart, or "dissected" on all counts. That's the nature of the beast and I think more people do it than you realize. There's a reason Branagh isn't coming back to direct the sequel, just as there's a reason Raimi will never direct another Spider-Man movie and why I assume Joe Johnston won't be returning for Cap 2.
For me, those angles were about perspective not disorder. When you look at things in a slightly different way than you are used to doing, sometimes you see something in a new way or notice something you never did before.
Regardless of the intent, they're free to break the rules if they want to, it doesn't change the fact that they were everywhere. It started to become hard to watch for me because it's all I would notice. And it was confusing because I didn't know why they were doing it. Like I said before, dutch angles are usually only used for a short amount of time because they illicit a specific effect. If you're off kilter like that for too long, sometimes people notice. I'm not saying everyone notices, I realize not everyone knows what's going on behind the camera, but if I was a DP I might start to wonder if people in the know might find it distracting.

[cherokeesam]

The whole point of using different camera angles and other cinematography tricks & techniques is to make you, the viewer, *not* notice them, but just to experience them on a subliminal level. Dutch angles are great for Hitchcockian suspense in creating a sinister, off-kilter atmosphere. In Battlefield Earth, as pointed out above, the director used those angles often and uselessly (in other words, the scene didn't call for an off-kilter atmosphere). From what I've seen of Branagh's use of the technique, including Thor, he's smart enough to use it sparingly and only when it's needed.....I don't recall any of those angles showing up *unnecessarily.*

[cherokeesam]

Breaking news:

Looks like Patty Jenkins is moving out of the Rumor Dept. and into the "Confirmed" Dept.:

http://**************.com/fansites/GraphicCity/news/?a=47170

So when we ran into Jenkins at the premiere of Five at Skylight Soho on Monday, we asked her if Thor 2 was really next on her slate. “I can’t say, but yes,” she laughed. “I can’t say anything definitive, but it’s exciting to be in talks with them about it.” Jenkins understands she’s an unusual choice for the project — she hasn’t worked with big special effects before. “I think Marvel is really ballsy to think outside the box,” she said. “And I think everyone they’ve talked to and hired has been interesting.” While the deal is still being sorted out, she's prepping for the gig, surreptitiously. When asked what she was reading, comics- and graphic-novel-wise, she said, “Right now, I’m reading all of … I can’t say.”

[marcvader]

Oh well, here we go. Fingers crossed

[BobbyCorwin88]

Cool stuff!

On a side note, the wonderful guys at Rifftrax have just released their Thor riff. Here's a sample.
PewHLeAblqA

[Whiskey Tango]

On a side note, the wonderful guys at Rifftrax have just released their Thor riff. Here's a sample.
PewHLeAblqA

LOL I might have to pick that up.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Breaking news:

Looks like Patty Jenkins is moving out of the Rumor Dept. and into the "Confirmed" Dept.:

http://**************.com/fansites/GraphicCity/news/?a=47170



Cool. What is everyone's thoughts about this?

I'm not entirely sure but let's just say that I hope Thor2 will be on par with the original but darker and explore the characters a little more, especially the relationship between Thor, the warrior's 3 and the lady Sif.

[R_Hythlodeus]

Breaking news:

Looks like Patty Jenkins is moving out of the Rumor Dept. and into the "Confirmed" Dept.:

http://**************.com/fansites/GraphicCity/news/?a=47170

Well, all Jenkins confirmed was that she's in talks with Marvel, not that she already got the job. She seems very enthusiastic about it, though.

[BigThor]

From what I've heard about her work on Monster she's guaranteed to bring is good drama and good performances, now let's hope that the script is good and she has a great crew to help her out with action scenes.

[Nave 'Torment']

Have at thee, Nave!!

How're things going Dark Raven :woot: ? And no, I didn't abandon the Bat-threads completely. Just bouncin' back and forth.

[Nave 'Torment']

Dutch angles don't bother me really. Comic books are FULL of them and Marvel almost requires the artists to use them to create action in non action scenes/pannels.

I guess you have a point there. Alex Ross' angles, which are some of my favourites, are similarly extreme right? Well, maybe not as slanted as a dutch angle, but still there. Either way, it didn't seem to bother me at all, was a lot more concerned / attentive of the characters and the narration than the cinematography.

I didn't even notice them. I was too invested in what was happening

Ditto.

That's why it suck to talk cbm's with film school people sometimes.

A couple of years later, it all makes sense. I used to give these movies a pass because their characters have always been an object of adoration to me, but I simply can't do that anymore. If there's an error in your film on any level, usually, someone who's had schooling in the field is going to notice it and count it against it. Not to say that it always kills the integrity of the film, there's hardly ever been one made that doesn't have a slew of pre, post or production errors. But those in the know understand them and how they effect the film in the long run. It becomes easier to see when bad decisions are made and usually who's responsible for them.

Take Thor for instance. Either Branagh or his DP (Director of Photography) decided that having a majority of their shots be on a cant, or dutch angle, would be a good idea. In film, a dutch angle is implemented, usually, to evoke disorder or disorient the audience in one way or another. You probably notice them a lot in horror movies. So it then makes little sense as to why most of the shots in Thor are shown this way as the story is pretty straightforward and not much "disorder" is present. The reason you use it sparingly is because you don't want that particular effect to last for the entirety of the movie, it's only supposed to evoke a particular feeling when it's relevant. The very first time I saw Thor in theaters, it was almost the only thing I noticed. IMO, it hurt the overall character of the film.

I think it's kind of hard being a comic book and movie fan. You would think the two mix perfectly, but it's not always the case. I'd say only a few have really hit all the right notes and even they have problems. I guess what I'm getting at is try not to get too frustrated with film people when it comes to CBM's. We can't turn it off. =)

This is an excellent post, it really is. And you should never let any thing just pass simply out of blind adoration! And yes, I suppose to a trained eye even the slightest change in cinematography becomes immediately visible, if you don't comment on that there won't be anyone else to talk about this. Every film, every work of art, has it's share of flaws, isn't that why we all continue towards that paradigm of perfection anyway?

But you don't need me to talk about the values of criticism. I wanted to point out though, that if one uses the Dutch angle in a different (yet conscious) way, say instead of using it to imply disorder, a director uses it to establish settings, will it work? What I'm asking is, can the Dutch angle be originally used for any other purpose, effectively, other than to convey a sense of disorientation from the viewers? I remember the hospital scene in Thor, and if those angles are used most prevalently during the Earth/Midgard scenes it does, to an extent, make sense because Thor was experiencing disorientation, disorder, and confusion. Could it have been a more subtle, grammatical nudge towards the central theme of the film? After all, form and style is often inseparable from content right?

[marcvader]

Sorry to jump in here, but I dont watch movies to 'dissect' them, I go to the movies to be entertained and taken to another world for 2 hours because I have had a hard day at work, etc, which is exactly what Thor did for me, I find it incredibly entertaining, and even if I watch it 1000 more times it will never be to dissect it.

I agree.

[Nave 'Torment']

I think we're putting a lot of negativity on the word 'dissection', think of it as 'solving the puzzle' if it's better. Contrary to popular belief, the audience is not passive, not always. It's a lot more fun to try and figure out the grand themes and the small allusions - heck, it's those things that make the 1000th view all the more memorable.

[Whiskey Tango]

Well, for my part I think the tilted cam added an otherworldly feel to a lot of the shots. Loki sitting on the throne, or the first shot of Heimdall standing guard over Bifrost. If that was Branagh's intent, then mission accomplished as far as I'm concerned.

[marcvader]

Problem is it becomes tedious when you discuss these things with wanabe film makers.

[BobbyCorwin88]

This is an excellent post, it really is. And you should never let any thing just pass simply out of blind adoration! And yes, I suppose to a trained eye even the slightest change in cinematography becomes immediately visible, if you don't comment on that there won't be anyone else to talk about this. Every film, every work of art, has it's share of flaws, isn't that why we all continue towards that paradigm of perfection anyway?

But you don't need me to talk about the values of criticism. I wanted to point out though, that if one uses the Dutch angle in a different (yet conscious) way, say instead of using it to imply disorder, a director uses it to establish settings, will it work? What I'm asking is, can the Dutch angle be originally used for any other purpose, effectively, other than to convey a sense of disorientation from the viewers? I remember the hospital scene in Thor, and if those angles are used most prevalently during the Earth/Midgard scenes it does, to an extent, make sense because Thor was experiencing disorientation, disorder, and confusion. Could it have been a more subtle, grammatical nudge towards the central theme of the film? After all, form and style is often inseparable from content right?
Thanks! Nice of you to say.

I understand what you mean and I do agree with you. One of the things my schooling has taught me is that in order to break the rules you have to know them first. In other words, the dutch angle can absolutely be used in a different format than what its traditional use is, you just have to have the skill and capacity to convey your message through the technique. I do think it worked better in the hospital scene you described, because that was a truly disorienting and chaotic scene. Maybe not extremely chaotic, but it helped convey the message. But, even if Branagh was trying to convey something through the use of the camera angle, I don't think he had to do it by repeating the technique over and over to the point that he did. Like I said, I realize not everyone sees it the same way I or others do, and that's fine. But it is one of those things that I would think a film maker should be aware of beforehand. It's simply the first thing that stands out in my mind when I think about Thor.

That's a great point though. The rules can absolutely be broken, you just have to know what they are first.
Problem is it becomes tedious when you discuss these things with wanabe film makers.
Yeah, the furthest I'll probably ever get is set work, but nice of you to say. I'm just using what I've learned man, nothing else.

[Crimson King]

Problem is it becomes tedious when you discuss these things with wanabe film makers.

I give them more leeway than others, I suppose. As a writer, I know I tend to be more critical of plot and dialog mistakes and I'm sure people get tired of hearing me whine when I continually bring those subjects up. More often than not, if I don't like a movie, it's because the writing turned me off.

[DarkSovereignty]

yeah i tend to look at things from a writers perspective too. I felt thor had some of the strongest writing of the marvel films. the Shakespearean royalty, the Arthurian aspect of a mystic hammer sitting upon a stone awaiting someone worthy, and how they were tied into a very sci-fi oriented story, i just loved it.

[R_Hythlodeus]

does someone here want to talk about the whole road movie aspect the sequel is rumored to have? I find that part most interesting.

[marcvader]

Sorry Bobby, the comment wasn't directed at you or all film students but to the obnoxious wanabes that brow beat you to death with their new found knowledge. I went to art school and took classes with film students and many of them were so pretentious it was annoying. Just cause one learns something doesn't make one an expert or even good at it and that's what some of these kids didn't understand and there's lots on these movie forums.

[cherokeesam]

Cool. What is everyone's thoughts about this?

I'm not entirely sure but let's just say that I hope Thor2 will be on par with the original but darker and explore the characters a little more, especially the relationship between Thor, the warrior's 3 and the lady Sif.

I posted this earlier, but I'm guessing that Jenkins was chosen for her feminine insight as well as her possible "ins" with Charlize Theron (who might be persuaded to come aboard as, say, Enchantress if her ol' buddy Patty Jenkins is directing again).

I'm really expecting a lot more focus on Thor's relationships (not just romantic ones) with the women in his life --- Jane, Sif, Frigga, and Enchantress.

But we'll see....everything's early yet.

[BobbyCorwin88]

Sorry Bobby, the comment wasn't directed at you or all film students but to the obnoxious wanabes that brow beat you to death with their new found knowledge. I went to art school and took classes with film students and many of them were so pretentious it was annoying. Just cause one learns something doesn't make one an expert or even good at it and that's what some of these kids didn't understand and there's lots on these movie forums.
No worries. I shouldn't have assumed. You're right on the money.

[BobbyCorwin88]

Alright, so I just got done watching the rifftrax for Thor and they made a great joke in Thor's banishment scene: "Huh, sounds like an argument I once had sitting on Santa's lap!"

Which inspired me to create this:

http://i54.tinypic.com/264knxd.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/9gh88w.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/2zqqyxk.jpg
http://i54.tinypic.com/2vxlvlu.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/e9dq81.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/kyxox.jpg

[Nave 'Torment']

Well, for my part I think the tilted cam added an otherworldly feel to a lot of the shots. Loki sitting on the throne, or the first shot of Heimdall standing guard over Bifrost. If that was Branagh's intent, then mission accomplished as far as I'm concerned.

Oh yes! That shot with Loki as the Asgardian King sits right there with the 'flyt' between Loki and Odin, as one of the most memorable moments for me! I like the suddenness with which it came up - and the entire shot contrasts greatly with Thor's commemoration at the beginning. And immediately you get a sense that the 'rightful heir' has been misplaced. It also solidifies Loki's role as a traitor to the rest of the Asgardians (well, Thor's pals anyway). And, maybe it was just me, but Hiddleson got a lot of mileage there playing the classic supervillain. You don't expect to see scenes like that, especially ones that make it work!

I give them more leeway than others, I suppose. As a writer, I know I tend to be more critical of plot and dialog mistakes and I'm sure people get tired of hearing me whine when I continually bring those subjects up. More often than not, if I don't like a movie, it's because the writing turned me off.

I know what you mean. I'm usually criticised for looking too much into things. But hey, that's why it's called 'critical analysis' right? It's supposed to be critical.

I understand what you mean and I do agree with you. One of the things my schooling has taught me is that in order to break the rules you have to know them first. In other words, the dutch angle can absolutely be used in a different format than what its traditional use is, you just have to have the skill and capacity to convey your message through the technique. I do think it worked better in the hospital scene you described, because that was a truly disorienting and chaotic scene. Maybe not extremely chaotic, but it helped convey the message. But, even if Branagh was trying to convey something through the use of the camera angle, I don't think he had to do it by repeating the technique over and over to the point that he did. Like I said, I realize not everyone sees it the same way I or others do, and that's fine. But it is one of those things that I would think a film maker should be aware of beforehand. It's simply the first thing that stands out in my mind when I think about Thor.

That's a great point though. The rules can absolutely be broken, you just have to know what they are first.

A fitting code to live by :)


does someone here want to talk about the whole road movie aspect the sequel is rumored to have? I find that part most interesting.

Thor, Jane and the Nine Realms. What more can you want? :D What I loved about Thor and X-Men First Class, as superhero films, is the fact that they were so deeply about character rather than plot. Thor had some of the most fantastical things you can come up with, and yet Branagh made it work because he made it about the characters rather than about the God of Thunder fighting the God of Mischief. Some element of that drama should definitely be retained in the sequel, and if Patty Jenkins is really the director then I guess it's a blessing that her last film was a character-study.

[04nbod]

Breaking news:

Looks like Patty Jenkins is moving out of the Rumor Dept. and into the "Confirmed" Dept.:

http://**************.com/fansites/GraphicCity/news/?a=47170


Ahh, the tease. Reading all of what? The Simonson run? the JMS run? a mini series?

[cherokeesam]

Ahh, the tease. Reading all of what? The Simonson run? the JMS run? a mini series?

I hope it's Straczynski.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Breaking news:

Looks like Patty Jenkins is moving out of the Rumor Dept. and into the "Confirmed" Dept.:

http://**************.com/fansites/GraphicCity/news/?a=47170



Hhhhmmm, again, the news doesnt excite, and as someone who was a huge fan of the first movie I really am gutted Branagh isnt coming back, but I wasnt excited about his hiring either for the first movie so we'll see.

I do think I would be more excited for this if were getting a more high profile director, I just hope we dont get another Iron Man 2 situation were the sequel was a big step down from the first movie.

[R_Hythlodeus]

Interview with Stevenson here:
http://blogs.coventrytelegraph.net/thegeekfiles/2011/09/ray-stevenson-talks-thor-2-gi.html
THOR WAS ONE OF THE YEAR'S BIGGEST BLOCKBUSTERS. HOW DID YOU LAND THE PART OF HIS ALLY, VOLSTAGG, ONE OF THE WARRIORS THREE?
Kenneth Branagh just called me up and he says, 'Ray, I've got this job...', I said, 'I'll do it!' He said, 'No, let me explain. I've been watching your work love, I know you're a big strapping guy and everything, but there's this part and I think you could do it'. Then the role nearly killed me. We were filming in New Mexico and LA. I had to have a vest on with ice water pumped through pipes on this vest to cool your core temperature down. I mean there's this huge latex fat suit, then a big pashmina woolly scarf as a beard, then a nice woolly hat as his headpiece. Then they put armour on you and give you a six-bladed axe to wield (see picture below of Ray in the role).
WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE IN THOR 2?
I think they're in talks with the director now. I know they want to mash these worlds together in The Avengers. I don't know. If the sequel happens it may be that Thor will go off on a wild adventure on his own and lead The Warriors Three to Asgard. We'll see.

[scatterax]

Alright, so I just got done watching the rifftrax for Thor and they made a great joke in Thor's banishment scene: "Huh, sounds like an argument I once had sitting on Santa's lap!"

Which inspired me to create this:

http://i54.tinypic.com/264knxd.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/9gh88w.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/2zqqyxk.jpg
http://i54.tinypic.com/2vxlvlu.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/e9dq81.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/kyxox.jpg

saved lol

[GoblinWhirlwind]

Alright, so I just got done watching the rifftrax for Thor and they made a great joke in Thor's banishment scene: "Huh, sounds like an argument I once had sitting on Santa's lap!"

Which inspired me to create this:

http://i54.tinypic.com/264knxd.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/9gh88w.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/2zqqyxk.jpg
http://i54.tinypic.com/2vxlvlu.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/e9dq81.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/kyxox.jpg

Awesome :hehe: :up:

[Godzilla2000]

Alright, so I just got done watching the rifftrax for Thor and they made a great joke in Thor's banishment scene: "Huh, sounds like an argument I once had sitting on Santa's lap!"

Which inspired me to create this:

http://i54.tinypic.com/264knxd.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/9gh88w.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/2zqqyxk.jpg
http://i54.tinypic.com/2vxlvlu.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/e9dq81.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/kyxox.jpg

I love it! This really cheers me up!

[BobbyCorwin88]

Thanks dudes! I was laughing my butt off when I heard it.

[itchyscratch]

Hemsworth on Jenkins ....

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2011/09/28/thor-2-chris-hemsworth-praises-director-patty-jenkins/

[Godzilla2000]

I've been thinking a lot about this but I have a sneaking suspicion that Loki will come to some sort of violent end in this upcoming sequel. In Avengers I believe that he will present some pretty strong evidence that he is a very dangerous threat to the stability of the nine realms. Actually the start of this lean towards destruction was pretty much illustrated in Thor when Loki utilized genocidal actions to deal with his conflicts like sending the Destroyer to wipe out everything on Earth just to eliminate Thor. And yes, much has been made of the Frost Giants being evil, but I personally don't buy that all the Frost Giants are malevolent beings. What about a silent minority who may want a peaceful cooperation with Asgard to restore Jotunheim to its former glory but stay in the background because of fear?

I believe I'd made a remark about this in the Avengers forums, but I've been thinking how far Loki would push Odin to the brink before he crosses the line, forcing Odin to have to kill Loki's fleshly body to prevent a universal wide apocalypse? Odin made a sworn vow a long time ago to protect the nine realms, and I know he wouldn't want to have to resort to killing Loki, but if it came to that point he'd have to to keep his oath. Being the King of Asgard is a position that entails making some very hard, often heart breaking decisions for the better good of the nine realms. I'd guarantee you should something like this come to pass it will be the most heart rending, dramatic chain of events in any of the Marvel movies with such gifted performers to bring it to life. I mean my God, just imagine Odin weeping openly as he cradles Loki's lifeless body, images of that innocent child he held in his arms on Jotunheim in his mind.

Hemsworth on Jenkins ....

Naughty mind resisting urge to make a flippant comment...>_<

[cherokeesam]

I've been thinking a lot about this but I have a sneaking suspicion that Loki will come to some sort of violent end in this upcoming sequel. In Avengers I believe that he will present some pretty strong evidence that he is a very dangerous threat to the stability of the nine realms. Actually the start of this lean towards destruction was pretty much illustrated in Thor when Loki utilized genocidal actions to deal with his conflicts like sending the Destroyer to wipe out everything on Earth just to eliminate Thor. And yes, much has been made of the Frost Giants being evil, but I personally don't buy that all the Frost Giants are malevolent beings. What about a silent minority who may want a peaceful cooperation with Asgard to restore Jotunheim to its former glory but stay in the background because of fear?

I believe I'd made a remark about this in the Avengers forums, but I've been thinking how far Loki would push Odin to the brink before he crosses the line, forcing Odin to have to kill Loki's fleshly body to prevent a universal wide apocalypse? Odin made a sworn vow a long time ago to protect the nine realms, and I know he wouldn't want to have to resort to killing Loki, but if it came to that point he'd have to to keep his oath. Being the King of Asgard is a position that entails making some very hard, often heart breaking decisions for the better good of the nine realms. I'd guarantee you should something like this come to pass it will be the most heart rending, dramatic chain of events in any of the Marvel movies with such gifted performers to bring it to life. I mean my God, just imagine Odin weeping openly as he cradles Loki's lifeless body, images of that innocent child he held in his arms on Jotunheim in his mind.



Naughty mind resisting urge to make a flippant comment...>_<

All that's nice postulation, and it may even work, but keep in mind that the gods --- in particular, the Norse gods, even in Marvel Comics --- have an eternal Get Out of Jail Free Card. And that card is called: Ragnarok.

Ragnarok is fated. Ragnarok will happen. There is no escaping that fate, and no escaping the exact sequence of events that leads to that fate.

Bottom line is: that means neither Loki, nor Thor, nor any other god can die, *period,* except in the manner that is laid out by the Norns (Fates) according to the Rules of Ragnarok. So even if Odin ever got to the point where he wanted/needed to kill Loki, he simply *couldn't.*

The best he can manage is to exile him, the way he does in the comics, which only delays the inevitable day when Ragnarok arrives.

[Godzilla2000]

All that's nice postulation, and it may even work, but keep in mind that the gods --- in particular, the Norse gods, even in Marvel Comics --- have an eternal Get Out of Jail Free Card. And that card is called: Ragnarok.

And this is exactly what I'm leading to. It's the big old reset button narratively speaking. I believe when the natural balance between good and evil tips too far out of balance Ragnarok happens, right? I believe in the comics Thor managed to decapitate Loki which put him out of commission for awhile? But the knowledge that even in death all the main characters could come back to life shouldn't limit some great, Oscar worthy meaty scenes of anguish and turmoil.

I think the one thing fans of the comics need to remember is that there is a majority of us, like yours truly, who have never read the comics. Prior to this movie franchise the only other exposure I had to Thor's mythos was that Incredible Hulk T.V. movie he appeared in a long time ago. Sometimes you need to think more like the non-comic fan to understand expanding concepts in terms of dramatic tension in a film. Case in Point: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is considered to be one of the finest movies in the TOS movie compendium, but one of the main people responsible for the creative process decisions was producer Harve Bennett who'd never watched nor was a fan of Star Trek prior to working on the film. Sure we all know that Spock comes back in the next movie, but that does not negate the overall dramatic punch his death at the end Khan still has to this day.

[cherokeesam]

And this is exactly what I'm leading to. It's the big old reset button narratively speaking. I believe when the natural balance between good and evil tips too far out of balance Ragnarok happens, right? I believe in the comics Thor managed to decapitate Loki which put him out of commission for awhile? But the knowledge that even in death all the main characters could come back to life shouldn't limit some great, Oscar worthy meaty scenes of anguish and turmoil.

I think the one thing fans of the comics need to remember is that there is a majority of us, like yours truly, who have never read the comics. Prior to this movie franchise the only other exposure I had to Thor's mythos was that Incredible Hulk T.V. movie he appeared in a long time ago. Sometimes you need to think more like the non-comic fan to understand expanding concepts in terms of dramatic tension in a film. Case in Point: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is considered to be one of the finest movies in the TOS movie compendium, but one of the main people responsible for the creative process decisions was producer Harve Bennett who'd never watched nor was a fan of Star Trek prior to working on the film. Sure we all know that Spock comes back in the next movie, but that does not negate the overall dramatic punch his death at the end Khan still has to this day.


Actually, it *does* negate the drama of Spock's death in TWOK. ;) That's one reason I still absolutely despise Trek III as the absolute worst of the lot, because it's the ultimate in cheesy cop-outs. I regard TWOK as not only the best in the series, but a genuinely outstanding movie masterpiece that stands on its own merit, even beyond any viewer knowledge of the franchise at all.

But yeah, I get what you're saying about canon, and I agree that there's no guarantee that Marvel Studios will apply the same "rules" to Loki as the comic books. But for a more pedestrian argument, I'd still say it's unlikely that Loki will die in Thor 2 or any other movie anytime soon simply due to the 7 (or however many) movie contract Hiddleston's signed.

[Godzilla2000]

Actually, it *does* negate the drama of Spock's death in TWOK. ;)

I guess it must be my age and gender then because every time I watch Khan I am a blubbery mess at the end of the movie.

But yeah, I get what you're saying about canon, and I agree that there's no guarantee that Marvel Studios will apply the same "rules" to Loki as the comic books. But for a more pedestrian argument, I'd still say it's unlikely that Loki will die in Thor 2 or any other movie anytime soon simply due to the 7 (or however many) movie contract Hiddleston's signed.

Now now, just because Loki would be bereft of a physical body doesn't mean that Tom Hiddleston can't still play him. And like I said there could be a build up top Ragnarok which could have Loki and many other Asgardians who have perished get their physical bodies back.

[Vartha]

heh I just don't see why you ladies are more atracted to Tom over Chris...then I am a guy and maybe it's just the underdog thing.

[sgaana]

Depends on the lady. :cwink: Tom is great, but Chris, and the character of Thor, is more my thing.

[Lady Marion]

Same here :woot:. To be honest, I can't speak clearly, when Thor (Chris) appears shirtless on screen.

But a lot of girls love rather the bad boys :cwink:. And Tom is great as Loki.

[DarknessOfDeath]

It will be interesting if they explain how Thor returns to Earth and that maybe S.H.I.E.L.D has something to do with what Jane, Darcy and Selvig are doing near the end of the film. Will that scene at the end of the credits be explained in the Avengers?


Can May 4th come any sooner? lols.

[Crimson King]

Josh Dallas Talks Thor 2 Filming and New Director:

Dallas believes that Branagh will be back as a producer, so his touch will still be there. While the actor hasn’t met Jenkins yet, he did say, “[A]pparently Marvel are in love with her and I'm sure she is going to be a really exciting and interesting choice. She's done some great work before. Marvel always have a really good idea for those directors that are going to come in and they may seem out of left field, but they always have a plan and they're always really smart.”

SOURCE (http://splashpage.mtv.com/2011/10/04/josh-dallas-talks-thor-2-filming-and-new-director/)

[BigThor]

The only thing that I'm worried about Patty not being good at "action scenes", because she already showed us that she's awesome in the drama department.

[steintym]

I do like the idea of Branagh at least being involved as a producer. At least there can be some continuity between productions. Although, I know that producer title can be just that ... a title.

[itchyscratch]

heh I just don't see why you ladies are more atracted to Tom over Chris...then I am a guy and maybe it's just the underdog thing.

Oh Thor is Phwoar! 100% attraction perving value all the way for me. But Tom cracks me up and I love the character of Loki. The two of them are a great combination.

But I do also think that Chris is a very good actor, not just beefcake. I hope we get to see him stretch his acting chops in Thor 2 and The Avengers. Because Joss has worked with Chris before, I hope he gives him some challenging scenes from an acting pov.

[Lady Marion]

100% agreement. Chris is a very talented actor. You see it best in the scene after the fight in the compound when Loki visits Thor, for instance.

So I hope when Chris signed for several Marvel movies that he will not be fixed in this kind of roles as beefcake or low-level action hero.

[GoblinWhirlwind]

I hope we see the creative powers of Mjolnir that Odin spoke about at some point... I've been reading about Norse mythology and Thor could restore his goats to life with Mjolnir as long as their bones were unbroken.

[itchyscratch]

I feel the sudden need to petition Marvel to make sure we get those goats in Thor 2. Big. Angry. Goats!

[Gamma Burst]

Josh Dallas Talks Thor 2 Filming and New Director:



SOURCE (http://splashpage.mtv.com/2011/10/04/josh-dallas-talks-thor-2-filming-and-new-director/)

Good news!

Btw, this forum feels like a good place to post again. I wonder why.:oldrazz:

[DarknessOfDeath]

Good news!

Btw, this forum feels like a good place to post again. I wonder why.:oldrazz:


It always is, isn't it? :awesome:

[04nbod]

I feel the sudden need to petition Marvel to make sure we get those goats in Thor 2. Big. Angry. Goats!

Tour of the Nine Realms you say? Goats you want?

http://images.tfaw.com/tfaw2007/blog/ThorTMA/ThorTMA5p1.jpg

:hrt:

[Godzilla2000]

I'm just wondering if they're ever going to reveal that it was in fact the Nyan Cat that's behind the technology of the Rainbow Bridge.

ZGb_JxwAep0
*This is so going in my sig!*

Good news!

Btw, this forum feels like a good place to post again. I wonder why.:oldrazz:

It's because I'm here now!

I feel the sudden need to petition Marvel to make sure we get those goats in Thor 2. Big. Angry. Goats!

I don't know...you might have to settle for those fainting goats instead.

[Gamma Burst]

Toothgnasher and Toothgrinder would be so cool to see!

[Godzilla2000]

Hmmm...not being familiar with the comics I have no idea who those two are. Care to enlighten me?

[BigThor]

Thor's goats

[Whiskey Tango]

100% agreement. Chris is a very talented actor. You see it best in the scene after the fight in the compound when Loki visits Thor, for instance.

So I hope when Chris signed for several Marvel movies that he will not be fixed in this kind of roles as beefcake or low-level action hero.

Dude got me choked up five minutes into Star Trek. I knew then he was going to be a good choice.

[TheCorpulent1]

Hmmm...not being familiar with the comics I have no idea who those two are. Care to enlighten me?

Thor's goats

In the myths as well.

[Vartha]

Yeah they are cool
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Oxv-iaQSL._SS500_.jpg

[TheCorpulent1]

I almost wish Marvel's Thor couldn't fly so he would have to rely on Toothgnasher and Toothgrinder's chariot more. We don't see those guys enough. :D

[BigThor]

I'd take a flying Thor over a chariot riding Thor any day, but that's just my humble opinion.

[misjuevos]

flying Thor was great to see in live action. Though I'm sure there are times chariot Thor would be appropriate. Like in the movie how he , Loki ,sif and the warriors three rode horses on the bifrost. maybe the warriors three will ride somehing that flies and Thor wants to ride alongside them. but yea I like flying Thor too. still hoping for space flying Thor. one good thing about his goats is that they also fly in space.

[Vartha]

I almost wish Marvel's Thor couldn't fly so he would have to rely on Toothgnasher and Toothgrinder's chariot more. We don't see those guys enough. :D
heh Yeah tho I'd miss Thor's flying, tho goats make good gyros...Thor's goats can regenerate. image the amount of gyros you could eat!? :D

[Vartha]

flying Thor was great to see in live action. Though I'm sure there are times chariot Thor would be appropriate. Like in the movie how he , Loki ,sif and the warriors three rode horses on the bifrost. maybe the warriors three will ride somehing that flies and Thor wants to ride alongside them. but yea I like flying Thor too. still hoping for space flying Thor. one good thing about his goats is that they also fly in space.
Yeah I can see Thor hauling some of the Avengers around in the chariot if they ever make it to Asgard.

[DarknessOfDeath]

hmm. well I dunno about the whole Thor in a chariot but goats in space? haha.

Goats in space... baaaaaah. yeah that is...weird. I prefer flying Thor and don't mind me, I'm not too familiar with the comics just yet.

[Gamma Burst]

Well, we've already seen a eight-legged horse. Two flying goats wouldn't be so strange after all.:cool:

[herolee10]

I wonder if Thor's costume will change again in this film, let alone the appearance of his hammer, like they both have in the Avengers film?

[TheCorpulent1]

His hammer's different for Avengers? :huh:

[Son of Coul]

The handle's a bit longer and the now-black notches stick out rather than in. Or at least that's what I've noticed.

[TheCorpulent1]

Yeah, I just looked up pictures out of curiosity. Pretty minor change. I actually like it more the Avengers way.

[Gamma Burst]

I'm liking the new look.

[Son of Coul]

Not the best comparison pics but for reference-
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x285/HappyPalooza/mjolnir.jpg
I favor the new one too. :woot:

[herolee10]

One thing that i'm hoping to see is for Thor to display his natural strength against enemies without using his hammer. I'd like to see him use some hand to hand combat when he's fully powered.

[Gamma Burst]

Yes, that would be cool. Maybe we'll be getting some of that in the Avengers.

[04nbod]

I almost wish Marvel's Thor couldn't fly so he would have to rely on Toothgnasher and Toothgrinder's chariot more. We don't see those guys enough. :D

Thor can't really fly though.

[marcvader]

I'm lovin Thors sleeveless look so much. Grew up on classic 616 and wanted this look since day 1.

[TheCorpulent1]

Thor can't really fly though.
He can do a good enough impression that the distinction doesn't really matter. :oldrazz:

[GoblinWhirlwind]

Yeah, I like the new Mjolnir too. The silver on the handle looks cool, it's longer too.

[Gamma Burst]

Yeah, It's definitely an improvement .

[BigThor]

I'm one of the few people that likes Mjolnir's handle in THOR better than the one in the Avengers, but then again I always liked Mjolnir better with fairly short handles.

[TheCorpulent1]

It's not like a two-handed handle or anything. It still meets the short-handle requirement, plus the black looks better against the brown than silver does. But that's just my opinion.

Anyone else feel a little tingle when Thor looks up and Mjolnir flies to his hand in the Avengers trailer? :hehe:

[Gamma Burst]

I do. :cool:

[DarknessOfDeath]

oh yeah man! So epic! I can't wait til May 4th!!!! Argh. I mean, why can't we see it now? I want more but I know I shouldn't. :p

[Lady Marion]

Anyone else feel a little tingle when Thor looks up and Mjolnir flies to his hand in the Avengers trailer? :hehe:

Me, too. It looks so badass.:awesome:

[one4smoke]

I'm one of the few people that likes Mjolnir's handle in THOR better than the one in the Avengers, but then again I always liked Mjolnir better with fairly short handles.

I agree. Why would they feel the need to change it? I thought it was perfect in Thor.

I like the shorter handle also. I don't care for the metal cap on the end of the handle in the Avengers. The protruding lines don't look as good as the recessed lines on the handle either.

It WAS perfect.

[misjuevos]

I'm so excited to see Thor and Loki amongst the mortals. Loki already has shown superstrength.

[04nbod]

He can do a good enough impression that the distinction doesn't really matter. :oldrazz:


I was trying to explain this to someone after the movie. You can't really argue with them though, he looked like he flew. You can't throw yourself that horizontally and slow yourself to a stop. When he picks Jane up he jumps straight up, he should come right back down.

I would love to see some proper Jack Kirby Thor where he holds on to Mjolnir with both hands in front of him and arches his back. No Superman stuff.

[TheCorpulent1]

I was trying to explain this to someone after the movie. You can't really argue with them though, he looked like he flew. You can't throw yourself that horizontally and slow yourself to a stop. When he picks Jane up he jumps straight up, he should come right back down.

I would love to see some proper Jack Kirby Thor where he holds on to Mjolnir with both hands in front of him and arches his back. No Superman stuff.
I'm the opposite. I'm glad more portrayals of Thor are favoring simple flight visuals. The way Thor flew never really made much sense, especially when you consider that he's got a magic hammer. Just say Mjolnir magically allows him to negate gravity.

[herolee10]

Does anyone here wish to see Thor lead a giant army from the nine realms (whether it be his own people or individuals consisted from several realms) in the same way that Odin did on Earth, within a future film for the series?

[Gamma Burst]

I'm so excited to see Thor and Loki amongst the mortals. Loki already has shown superstrength.

Yeah, I'm also excited to see their superiority to mere mortals. ;)

[TheCorpulent1]

I'm a little worried that Captain America's going to look too good against Loki. We know they have a 1-on-1 fight, and if it doesn't end with Cap getting thrown through a building or encased in magical ice or something, it's gonna make Loki look a little pathetic.

[GoblinWhirlwind]

That's actually what I was worried about too... in those set pics Cap was kicking him in the throat and stuff. He's no Thor but he's still a god.

[TheCorpulent1]

On the other hand, there's a scene of Loki throwing Tony out a window in the trailer. So at the very least, that awesome thing will happen. :hehe:

[herolee10]

I'm a little worried that Captain America's going to look too good against Loki. We know they have a 1-on-1 fight, and if it doesn't end with Cap getting thrown through a building or encased in magical ice or something, it's gonna make Loki look a little pathetic.

yeah, I wouldn't worry too much about that. I think Loki will have no problem taking on Captain America, with with all of his valiant efforts.

[Vartha]

Yeah I noticed the handle to Mjolnir is a bit narrower and it has a "pommel" like end to it too.

I'll post pics in the morning of Mjolnir

[Whiskey Tango]

http://i54.tinypic.com/2053uq1.jpg

http://i51.tinypic.com/14bomjr.jpghttp://i51.tinypic.com/b67x2b.jpg

[BigThor]

I'm a little worried that Captain America's going to look too good against Loki. We know they have a 1-on-1 fight, and if it doesn't end with Cap getting thrown through a building or encased in magical ice or something, it's gonna make Loki look a little pathetic.

Same here, bcause the set videos of their fight made it seem far to even.

I'm also worried that Cap's going to trade blows with Thor like he's just another human since they probably want everyone to be on the same playing field.


http://i54.tinypic.com/2053uq1.jpg

http://i51.tinypic.com/14bomjr.jpghttp://i51.tinypic.com/b67x2b.jpg

I like the one from the first film better, but the differences are pretty minor so I'll be fine with the new one.

[misjuevos]

Makes me wonder if the addition of the pommel will be because Thor will twirl mjolnir alot more practically. Not go straight to cg but ease into it or something. Or maybe we see him hold the strap as he flies. My point is it might be for a practical functional reason.

[BigThor]

I'm so excited to see Thor and Loki amongst the mortals. Loki already has shown superstrength.

What super strength has Loki shown?

You can't be talkin about throwing Stark out of a window, a normal human could do that.

[DarknessOfDeath]

I wonder if we'll get any news at Comic-con regarding the status of Thor2.

[Vartha]

Yeah me too Darkness. I know Corpy doesn't like to be spoiled, but I like to know what's going on with the movies.

[Vartha]

Same here, bcause the set videos of their fight made it seem far to even.

I'm also worried that Cap's going to trade blows with Thor like he's just another human since they probably want everyone to be on the same playing field.



I like the one from the first film better, but the differences are pretty minor so I'll be fine with the new one.
Is it me, or do even those two look a bit different?
The one on the left looks like the leather spirals down the handle over being rings like on the right and the first movie Mjolnir.

[Blader5489]

Thor 2 has been pushed back to November 15, 2013.

[04nbod]

Good. It was all moving way too fast for my liking. They don't even have an official director yet to take charge of the creative direction of the whole thing. I'm a bit less worried that Fiege is becoming a puppetmaster. Not to mention I'd like a few more writers to take a glance over the script. Natalie gets a bit more time to be fit and ready and her son will be a little older and need less attention should this push back production.

[Caboose]

This also helps Hemsworth get a bit of a breather. He's filming Snow White until January, then he goes straight to Rush which will film until April, which is when Thor 2 was slated to start filming. They'll probably push that back a little too.

[J.Howlett]

Completely happy with the push back. The last thing I want is a rushed Thor 2 in the vein of Iron Man 2.

Out of all the Avengers, this is the character I'm most curious to see the next chapter. And having basically 2 years to get it right is a good thing.

Now, November of 2013 is very crowded but I think it'll do fine, considering it was the breakout comic book movie this year.

I greatly awaiting further details on Thor 2.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Thor 2 has been pushed back to November 15, 2013.

Not sure if this is good or bad news. The good news is that at least more prep time can be spent on the film because what 04nbod said, the news we were getting were happening too fast. Considering how much time Chris Hemsworth has put into making the Avengers, he must be exhausted by now so at least there is some time where he can rest up before he begins shooting for Thor 2. So I think shooting won't begin until late spring early summer. I guess it depends on when the script will be ready and approved.

The bad news is, we have to wait til November 15th :p

[Sgt.Pepper]

I think it's good that Disney pushed the movie back, plus it also gives some space between Iron Man 3 and Thor 2. I hope we get some confirmation of Patty Jenkins helming the sequel soon.

[Alexei Belyakov]

While I'm happy for the creative repercussions of this, I don't see it helping the box office. November's pretty crowded with Mark Dindal's Me and My Shadow on November 8 & Pixar's newest project on November 27. Hopefully in between those two, Thor can still bank.

[samsnee]

Not sure if this is good or bad news. The good news is that at least more prep time can be spent on the film because what 04nbod said, the news we were getting were happening too fast. Considering how much time Chris Hemsworth has put into making the Avengers, he must be exhausted by now so at least there is some time where he can rest up before he begins shooting for Thor 2. So I think shooting won't begin until late spring early summer. I guess it depends on when the script will be ready and approved.

The bad news is, we have to wait til November 15th :p

I'm sure he's exhausted, but at the same time, he seems like the kind of guy that would appreciate getting steady work as an actor

But I agree, not sure if this is good or bad news. It will definitely stand out if the release date holds, but at the same time, that time of year is usually reserved for more "serious" films. Of course, Avatar made a buttload, so who knows for sure.

[Crimson King]

Didn't a few of the Potter movies come out in November? And Twilight (:barf:)?

Thor should be fine in that slot, but it will be a little weird to see a superhero movie in November.

[KangConquers]

This is horrible. November? *sigh*

[Sgt.Pepper]

While I'm happy for the creative repercussions of this, I don't see it helping the box office. November's pretty crowded with Mark Dindal's Me and My Shadow on November 8 & Pixar's newest project on November 27. Hopefully in between those two, Thor can still bank.

It's going to be tough for Thor 2 with the movies you've mentioned and Catching Fire releasing at the same month, but at least the release date is better than the original date (July 26, 2013), which has Robopocalypse, Pacific Rim and Horizons all hitting theaters. Now that would have be more challenging for the movie, if it had kept its original release date.

[Crimson King]

I'm not a betting man, but I'd put a bazillion dollars down that says Thor 2 will out-perform a Mark Dindal joint any day of the week. No worries there.

[Raiden]

I think it is a great decision for Disney to push the release date back to November 15th. They still don't have a director yet, and everything seems to be still in flux. And Chris Hemsworth just wrapped up The Avengers, so he deserves to have some time off (or finish off his other movie, Snow White and the Huntsman). The goal for Marvel & Disney shouldn't be trying to squeeze as much money from these franchises as possible, because they have to consider the long-term effect of making a sequel that is half-baked (like IM2), and it could affect not just their plan for Thor 3, but the sequel for The Avengers as well.

[BoredGuy]

Yeah, what the hell is 'Me and My shadow'?
and who the hell is Mark Dindal?

lol
I mean, I'm not a crazy movie geek, but I keep up on upcoming movies more than anyone else I know... and if i've never heard of it, I guarantee the GA doesn't give a s**t

On the Thor being moved topic, not sure how I feel on this, the summer's where the cash is at

[Alexei Belyakov]

Who the hell is Mark Dindal? The director of Chicken Little (which grossed $315 Million in 2005) & The Emperor's New Groove (which grossed $170 Million in 2000). He will give Thor a run for his money. As will Pete Docter.

[Son of Coul]

I'm actually happy about this. Like Thor 1, I was wondering how they were going to get to the finish line in time without being rushed until they pushed the release date back. It seems like things are only just starting to come together for Thor 2 now, so it's good it has the extra months. Also-- there's never jack**** to see in theaters in November, so this actually gives me something to look forward to. As a college student in a town with nothing but restaurants and movie theaters to go to for fun, that's a big plus for me.

[BoredGuy]

The director of Chicken Little (which grossed $315 Million in 2005) & The Emperor's New Groove (which grossed $170 Million in 2000). He will give Thor a run for his money. As will Pete Docter.

ummm, still not followin ya, lol, sorry
some movie from a director who made a moderately successful kids film 5 years ago doesn't exactly make me worry for Thor's box office

If anything those sorts of movies have legs, but not great opening weekends, so it'll give Thor time to dominate for a few weeks before the Pixar movie

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I must say the release date has totally baffled me, but I agree it wont hurt the movie to have a few more months to tweak things, its just, not really many blockbusters do well in November, so this has me a bit worried.

[Moridin]

I think it is a great decision for Disney to push the release date back to November 15th. They still don't have a director yet, and everything seems to be still in flux. And Chris Hemsworth just wrapped up The Avengers, so he deserves to have some time off (or finish off his other movie, Snow White and the Huntsman). The goal for Marvel & Disney shouldn't be trying to squeeze as much money from these franchises as possible, because they have to consider the long-term effect of making a sequel that is half-baked (like IM2), and it could affect not just their plan for Thor 3, but the sequel for The Avengers as well.

Agreed on all accounts, particularly the half-baked/IM2 comment.

I'm very happy it's been pushed back.

[Superhero 101]

thats odd

[Crimson King]

The director of Chicken Little (which grossed $315 Million in 2005) & The Emperor's New Groove (which grossed $170 Million in 2000). He will give Thor a run for his money. As will Pete Docter.

Put those two together and you have about as much as Thor made. If I'm Marvel, I'm not exactly shaking in my boots. Especially since it's a new IP.

[RealIrOnMaN]

Marvel Studios & Disney officially CONFIRMS "MONSTER"-helmer PATTY JENKINS to DIRECT "THOR 2"!!!

[RealIrOnMaN]

Marvel Studios announced today that Patty Jenkins will direct THOR 2, which will be released in theatres on Friday, November 15, 2013.

Chris Hemsworth and Natalie Portman will return to star in the film along with Tom Hiddleston. Marvel Studios’ Kevin Feige will produce the sequel to this summer’s blockbuster THOR, which has grossed over $448 million worldwide to date.

Patty Jenkins previously directed MONSTER starring Charlize Theron, who won an Academy Award® for her performance in the film. Jenkins, who received an Emmy nomination for directing the pilot of AMC’s acclaimed series The Killing, has also directed episodes of Entourage and Arrested Development. Most recently, she directed “Pearl,” one of the five short films that comprise Lifetime’s original movie FIVE.

In addition to THOR 2, Marvel Studios is currently scheduled to release MARVEL’S THE AVENGERS on May 4, 2012, and IRON MAN 3 which is slated for release on May 3, 2013.

[GoblinWhirlwind]

Was looking forward to Thor and Superman releasing close together... don't really get the November release date.

[misjuevos]

I'm just glad Hopkins is returning as Odin. I was worried once Branagh left Hopkins might too. He said he was about ready to stop acting till working with Branagh resparked his love for it.

[TheDragonator]

So Patty Jenkins has been confirmed, and it's been pushed back to November because of Lone Ranger.


Wait, why would it be pushed back because of Lone Ranger being released in May, two months before?

But my birthday's in November, so I ain't complaining.

[The Morningstar]

Interesting choice of director.

[04nbod]

I'm just glad Hopkins is returning as Odin. I was worried once Branagh left Hopkins might too. He said he was about ready to stop acting till working with Branagh resparked his love for it.

He also said it was a role he enjoyed and found it easy to find the character. Not to mention the film was a critical and commercial hit. I think Hopkins' camp would be unanimously hoping he would return.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Marvel Studios announced today that Patty Jenkins will direct THOR 2, which will be released in theatres on Friday, November 15, 2013.

Chris Hemsworth and Natalie Portman will return to star in the film along with Tom Hiddleston. Marvel Studios’ Kevin Feige will produce the sequel to this summer’s blockbuster THOR, which has grossed over $448 million worldwide to date.

Patty Jenkins previously directed MONSTER starring Charlize Theron, who won an Academy Award® for her performance in the film. Jenkins, who received an Emmy nomination for directing the pilot of AMC’s acclaimed series The Killing, has also directed episodes of Entourage and Arrested Development. Most recently, she directed “Pearl,” one of the five short films that comprise Lifetime’s original movie FIVE.

In addition to THOR 2, Marvel Studios is currently scheduled to release MARVEL’S THE AVENGERS on May 4, 2012, and IRON MAN 3 which is slated for release on May 3, 2013.


Sweet! This is great news!! Now, bring on the goodies!!! :awesome:

[Suzanne78]

I'm so excited for Patty Jenkins to be confirmed. As for the November release date, it might be nice to see the blockbuster movie season spread out a little bit. And I'm a November baby myself, so happy birthday to me :)

[DarknessOfDeath]

So Patty Jenkins has been confirmed, and it's been pushed back to November because of Lone Ranger.


Wait, why would it be pushed back because of Lone Ranger being released in May, two months before?

But my birthday's in November, so I ain't complaining.

So is mine except Thor2 comes out a week after.

[Whiskey Tango]

ummm, still not followin ya, lol, sorry
some movie from a director who made a moderately successful kids film 5 years ago doesn't exactly make me worry for Thor's box office

bu-but... chicken little!

lulz

[SuperSAINT]

Nice to get things moving...

Get me Hopkins & Heimdall onboard and then I'll be happy.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Don't forget Joshua Dallas, Jaimie Alexander and Ray Stevenson.

[TheCorpulent1]

I'm fine with both of these bits of news. Thor 2 will give fall 2013 a bit of excitement, as opposed to the massive dry spell we usually get after the summer movie season until Christmas. I've heard nothing but good things about both Monster and The Killing, so I'm okay with Patty Jenkins. Branagh's already done the heavy lifting by establishing the world and tone of Thor in the first movie. All Jenkins has to do is make a good action movie that follows those guidelines.

[Marvin]

This will obviously be marvels biggest and perhaps most ambitions film to date.

[marvelrobbins]

It would be nice If Anthony Hopkins was confirmed.We know Loki will be back.
I thought considering how Natalie Portman has done zero publicity for Thor that was
sign she wouldn't be back.I just hope there Is room for Jamie Alexander In sequel.

[herolee10]

Marvel Studios announced today that Patty Jenkins will direct THOR 2, which will be released in theatres on Friday, November 15, 2013.

Chris Hemsworth and Natalie Portman will return to star in the film along with Tom Hiddleston. Marvel Studios’ Kevin Feige will produce the sequel to this summer’s blockbuster THOR, which has grossed over $448 million worldwide to date.

Patty Jenkins previously directed MONSTER starring Charlize Theron, who won an Academy Award® for her performance in the film. Jenkins, who received an Emmy nomination for directing the pilot of AMC’s acclaimed series The Killing, has also directed episodes of Entourage and Arrested Development. Most recently, she directed “Pearl,” one of the five short films that comprise Lifetime’s original movie FIVE.

In addition to THOR 2, Marvel Studios is currently scheduled to release MARVEL’S THE AVENGERS on May 4, 2012, and IRON MAN 3 which is slated for release on May 3, 2013.


Glad to see that Natalie Portman is OFFICIALLY confirmed to reprise her role as Jane.

I'm betting that the film picks up immediately after the events of the Avengers.

[Sgt.Pepper]

I'm glad that Jenkins is confirmed as the director, she's certainly an intriguing choice. However, I'm even more glad to hear that Portman will return.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Put those two together and you have about as much as Thor made.

This is such an incorrect statement.

If you give Chicken Little Thor's IMAX 3D boost, 6 years of inflation & summer opener date, you get a nearly identical BO return.

With Emperor's New Groove its 11 years of inflation, plus that film cost $50 Million less than Thor.

[hatebox]

Most interesting thing is that Hiddleston's returning. Makes me wonder about his fate in the Avengers.

[TheCorpulent1]

Probably escapes. Think about it: at this stage, what do humans really have that could contain a god who teleports, casts illusions, can turn invisible, etc.?

[Carlo Comicus]

I'm so happy about Natalie Portman as Jane again!!!

[Crimson King]

This is such an incorrect statement.

If you give Chicken Little Thor's IMAX 3D boost, 6 years of inflation & summer opener date, you get a nearly identical BO return.

With Emperor's New Groove its 11 years of inflation, plus that film cost $50 Million less than Thor.

Thank you, oh wise one, for enlightening me with the concept of inflation. So if we factor in ticket sale price increases and go back in time to change the release dates of movies to support your argument and randomly bring in budget differences to the conversation, it all adds up to nothing that will change my original statement: Thor 2 needn't worry about a new movie from the director of Chicken Little.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Thank you, oh wise one, for enlightening me with the concept of inflation.

Love the sarcasm :yay:

So if we factor in ticket sale price increases and go back in time to change the release dates of movies to support your argument and randomly bring in budget differences to the conversation, it all adds up to nothing that will change my original statement: Thor 2 needn't worry about a new movie from the director of Chicken Little.

In other words, you don't wanna take into account the fact that Chicken Little was released when ticket prices were half of what they were for Thor's IMAX 3D showings nor that Thor was released during the most profitable time of the year while Chicken Little was released in November.

You think Thor II doesn't need to worry about Mark Dindal? Fine.

Me on the other hand, I wouldn't drop the Thor sequel in between 2 very proven animation powerhouses.

[Sebastos]

Thor 2, will be released on my birthday? Splendid I say!

[Crimson King]

In other words, you don't wanna take into account the fact that Chicken Little was released when ticket prices were half of what they were for Thor's IMAX 3D showings nor that Thor was released during the most profitable time of the year while Chicken Little was released in November.

You think Thor II doesn't need to worry about Mark Dindal? Fine.

Me on the other hand, I wouldn't drop the Thor sequel in between 2 very proven animation powerhouses.

I can't believe I'm arguing about freaking Chicken Little.

Was Chicken Little released within a week of a popular superhero film? No? Then your argument is invalid.

Some stats about everyone's favorite Mark Dindal joint:
Metacritic score: 32
imdb user rating: 5.8
Tomatometer: 36%
Chicken Little 2 gross: IT NEVER HAPPENED
Number of actual people who have heard of Mark Dindal: the same number of people typing on your keyboard

Can we move on to something else now please?

[Whiskey Tango]

lmao

[sgaana]

The director of Chicken Little (which grossed $315 Million in 2005) & The Emperor's New Groove (which grossed $170 Million in 2000). He will give Thor a run for his money. As will Pete Docter.

Ohhhhh. See, I was all, "who is this Dindal guy and what is this movie and why do I care?" But I really, really liked "The Emperor's New Groove"; very underrated Disney flick, IMO. ("Chicken Little", I did not see; promos didn't grab me.)

But, to be honest -- I don't see either his new film (if it's another animated or kid-oriented film), or the new Pixar film, as seriously hurting Thor 2. In fact, I think you could as easily argue that Thor 2 would be in a good position to get ticket sales from people who are looking for a more adult film than one of those two.

And I say that as an adult who definitely goes to kids films if they look good enough (and I don't have kids). The Pixar film (what film is it?) might be a must-see, might not. But I actually don't think there's THAT big an overlap in the adult audience -- that is, adults who will skip Thor 2 in order to see the kid films. (Although, if it goes up against "How to Train Your Dragon 2", that could be a problem. :cwink: )


So overall I'm happy about the date pushback. I don't understand it yet (why is the Lone Ranger coming out in May affecting Thor 2 which was already coming out in July? and do not get me started on my concerns about the Lone Ranger...), but I was always thinking that Marvel should take advantage of the winter holiday release dates, to get out of crowded summers.

Is Nov 2013 crowded with anything else, at the moment?

This might seem silly, but the "feel" of the Thor films says "winter" to me more than summer. (Maybe it's because it's more fantasy-oriented, and I'm now so used to big fantasy films in winter.)

Anyway -- YAY about Natalie Portman's confirmed return. And am cautiously pleased about Pattie Jenkins. I didn't actually see "Monster", but I hear a lot of good things about her.

[Saitou Hajime]

There's not much to worry about holiday in 2013 as of yet. No more Harry Potter or Twilight, and the Hobbit and Pixar's project seem to be the only standouts. The fact that Thor 2 is a sequel to a critically and commercially successful film also helps.

[Alexei Belyakov]

Some stats about everyone's favorite Mark Dindal joint:
Metacritic score: 32
imdb user rating: 5.8
Tomatometer: 36%
Chicken Little 2 gross: IT NEVER HAPPENED
Number of actual people who have heard of Mark Dindal: the same number of people typing on your keyboard

All of this has absolutely nothing to do with the BO.

Can we move on to something else now please?

Sure, why not. I think the Jets are gonna mop the floor with the Dolphins on Monday. Real shame. When I was growing up they were still regarded as a great team. Its not the coach's fault either. QB's got no protection.

[sgaana]

Right, and The Hobbit is December, anyway. Though, for that reason, Nov 15th is probably better for Thor 2 than Tgiving weekend would be.

Ah; the Pixar movie is the dinosaur one. Yeah. It's going to be really interesting to see how that one pans out. (I love dinosaurs. I love Pixar. Kids LOVE DINOSAURS, and Pixar. But, we'll see how it grabs me once we start seeing stuff from it. There are still Pixar movies I've never seen. At least, subject-wise, it's not really a competitor with Thor, either. Not like Brave is on a superficial level.)

[Flemm]

Interesting stuff, both the director and the release date. I couldn't be more psyched, really.

Bring it on :awesome:

[Saitou Hajime]

Anyway, this is going to be a good litmus test for Marvel Studios' properties, because if Thor 2 does good in the holidays like Thor did in summer, then that's just another movie season they can position their future projects in and steal away from the other studios.

On a semi-related note, how must it suck for Fox that they have to put up with Valentine season for Die Hard 5?

[Crimson King]

Anyway, this is going to be a good litmus test for Marvel Studios' properties, because if Thor 2 does good in the holidays like Thor did in summer, then that's just another movie season they can position their future projects in and steal away from the other studios.

On a semi-related note, how must it suck for Fox that they have to put up with Valentine season for Die Hard 5?

Almost as much as it sucks that we'd have to watch it :o

It's interesting that you bring up Thor's release date as an experiment. I've often thought they'd have to branch out of summer to fit in all the movies they want to make. They've announced plans for Blank Panther, Dr. Strange, Ant-Man, Guardians of the Galaxy, and the Inhumans. Couple those with the already-established IM/Cap/Thor movie franchises and you can see why they'd want to widen the scheduling choices.

[Liam_H]

Interested to see how it does against Catching Fire coming out a week later. Since Hunger Games isn't out yet we don't know if it'll cater to a wider audience or if they've turned it into Twilight 2.0

[TheCorpulent1]

Wow, I didn't realize Catching Fire would be out around the same time. The Hemsworth brothers' movies going head-to-head? Crazy. :)

[Crimson King]

Interested to see how it does against Catching Fire coming out a week later. Since Hunger Games isn't out yet we don't know if it'll cater to a wider audience or if they've turned it into Twilight 2.0

Oh, crap. THAT is some competition. Hunger Games fans are nearly as rabid as Twilighteers (and with good reason, IMO).

[Liam_H]

Here's the thing I haven't read the books but people tell me it can be enjoyed by both genders, not just the Twilight crowd. If that's so I hope they don't manipulate it into such so I can enjoy the movies also. But if that turns out to be the case, then with it coming out a week later it can certainly steal some of Thor's bank. With the Twilight movies they were mostly just for the rabid female fans but this is a wild card since we haven't seen the how Hungers Games has turned out yet.

I of course would see both if it came to that but Thor 2 might lose out a bit with the general audience if they have to choose.

[Chewy]

The first major superhero movie directed by a woman?

There's room for Thor 2 and Catching Fire to coexist. November is a BIG time at the BO.

[TheCorpulent1]

Here's the thing I haven't read the books but people tell me it can be enjoyed by both genders, not just the Twilight crowd. If that's so I hope they don't manipulate it into such so I can enjoy the movies also. But if that turns out to be the case, then with it coming out a week later it can certainly steal some of Thor's bank. With the Twilight movies they were mostly just for the rabid female fans but this is a wild card since we haven't seen the how Hungers Games has turned out yet.

I of course would see both if it came to that but Thor 2 might lose out a bit with the general audience if they have to choose.
The books are good and definitely appeal to both genders. I'm a dude and I enjoyed them a lot, as did my female cousin and two of my female friends.

[Liam_H]

Thor 2 is gonna try to ride the wave Potter(now Twilight) has been on for the past decade.

The books are good and definitely appeal to both genders. I'm a dude and I enjoyed them a lot, as did my female cousin and two of my female friends.

That's certainly what I've been hearing but I'm choosing not to read them before I see the movies. I wanna see how that effects how I feel about them afterwards. Read the books first for Potter and Twilight, so I wonder how differently I would've felt if I didn't.

[Hypestyle]

I'm getting nervous. Depending on how the production comes together, a Thanksgiving opening is going to be heavy competition, also kids are in school, whereas in summer they are not in school. if kids do go see the film multiple times it won't be during the weekdays.. this will be over-scrutinized for the weekend box office. If it's below XX million, it will be labeled as a flop.. more scrutiny since now it's a female director.. I want this film to succeed, but the story has to be there, and it can't be chopped up to just have a string of action sequences.. if there's romance, it has to be real, and not cheesy..

[Chewy]

Kids are in school during May, which is when Thor came out

[Liam_H]

It's release date is pretty good actually cause its a week before Thanksgiving holidays. It'll get its big opening weekend and have a softer drop off due to the upcoming holidays when everybody is off. Potter/Twilight use this very effectively. Catching Fire is the wild card that will affect it.

[TheCorpulent1]

I'm getting nervous. Depending on how the production comes together, a Thanksgiving opening is going to be heavy competition, also kids are in school, whereas in summer they are not in school. if kids do go see the film multiple times it won't be during the weekdays.. this will be over-scrutinized for the weekend box office. If it's below XX million, it will be labeled as a flop.. more scrutiny since now it's a female director.. I want this film to succeed, but the story has to be there, and it can't be chopped up to just have a string of action sequences.. if there's romance, it has to be real, and not cheesy..
I don't think that'll be a problem. It's got at least 1 of the same writers as Thor, as far as I know, and we've already seen that Hemsworth and Portman have good chemistry.

[Saitou Hajime]

Thor 2 vs Catching Fire:

Thor has an edge in that it's proven, and it's only a question of if Patty can deliver a worthy sequel. But CF hinges on HG being a hit, and just like with Harry Potter/Twilight and the numerous pretenders, they can really hit it big or come up short.

[Gamma Burst]

Great news, overall!

[Son of Coul]

By the logic that Mark Dindal is a threat because ****ing Chicken Little did well at the BO, I guess we're screwed with Avengers since Whedon's only previous movie bombed financially.

[steintym]

Awesome, glad to hear things are moving along.

[Chewy]

Now just cast Charlize as Enchantress and Kevin Durand as Executioner and get this thing rolling

[Gamma Burst]

Also I'm glad that, with the new release date, things won't get rushed.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Me too. Still it seems like an odd choice but considering all things, it will be interesting to see what she does and hope things go well with the process and everything. :up: Good luck Marvel!

[cherokeesam]

Here's a thought:

Maybe the change in release dates has less to do with Disney promoting The Lone Ranger as a summer tentpole instead of Thor 2, and more to do with Marvel slotting a *new* superhero film for summer 2013. I've got a hunch they may have done this to fastrack either Ant-Man or Dr. Strange into a summer movie position.

[Gamma Burst]

Yeah, I guess that's a possibility.

[BigThor]

Now just cast Charlize as Enchantress and Kevin Durand as Executioner and get this thing rolling

Or Nathan Jones