Breaking the realism?

[TheCorpulent1]

Long blonde hair like Alex Sarsgard's character in True Blood and Sawyer in Lost have wouldn't be hard to pull off at all. It just needs to be about shoulder-length, not crazy hair-metal style.

 

[X-Nemesis]

It is all abouit writing... If they do it well, it will kick ass like Army of Darkness. If they don't... it will look like Beast Master 2.

I can't agree more. Like any movie and especially fantasy ones, because there are way to many examples of badly scripted fantasy films, if the writing is good the rest of the movie will fall into place.

But to be honest, I'm very nervous that they can even pull this off well.

Thinking about it, the music also has to not be fantasy campy UGH.

 

[Agent 194]

In a world where we have, larger than life, over the top performers.... Sigfried and Roy (I know we could make a joke here. Be mature boys) Prince, James Brown, Arnold Schwartzenegger, Elvis Presley.... and in the comic book world...Superman. I just see Thor of that ilk. I've always seen Thor as the Superman of the Marvel world . Supes is certainly larger than life.

People are making statements about how a thunder god who walks around saying "I am an immortal" wouldn't be taken seriously. That was the very thing that solidified it for me as a kid...made it work for me....that they were so serious. They were so very sure what they were doing was real and important. It was THE most important thing in the universe when I read those comics. There was never any doubt. That's what hyper drama, and uber sincerity can do for a character. That's what the Marvel world needs in my opinion. Would be a shot in the arm.

 

[Rock Sexton]

In a science fiction world where a man can turn into a giant green monster, why would it be hard to believe that people can travel from one dimention to another???

........... because unless Thor can be scientifically explained, it changes the paradigm upon which practically all of the Avenger members have been founded. Thor is fantasy. The rest of the group is science. Favreau couldn't have said it better when he eluded to the Roger Rabbit effect. It's the cohesion factor. Fans of the comic are going to have no problem with, but we all know they don't make up the hundreds of millions of ticket sales Marvel anticipates. A general audience member might find it corny if not done right.

There's something to be said about one's imagination when putting these concepts together after reading a comic. It's another thing when it's on film and it's taking place in real life settings - as Avengers will.

Thor is no doubt the most delicate piece of the Avengers. It's absolutely crucial they set it up right.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I agree with this.

Also, this is a fictional world, and there is nothing realistic about becoming a giant green monster

It's not about realism...... it's about the levels of acceptability by the common movie viewer.

It's as simple as asking someone what's more believable (even though both concepts are obviously crazy) - a Thunder God who's from another dimension or a guy who's body was zapped with Gamma Rays which have caused crazy physical effects? The choice is pretty easy.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I still don't understand why Thor won't mesh well with the rest of the Avengers. It's not like there haven't been other movies where magic coexists with science.

I can't think of one movie off the top of my head where they successfully merged technology with magic. Technology's existence is reality's own magic, why magic itself is strictly fantasy related.

 

[SuperFerret]

It's not about realism...... it's about the levels of acceptability by the common movie viewer.

It's as simple as asking someone what's more believable (even though both concepts are obviously crazy) - a Thunder God who's from another dimension or a guy who's body was zapped with Gamma Rays which have caused crazy physical effects? The choice is pretty easy.

Thunder God from another dimension. Way more believable than gamma rays, which destroy living tissue as a rule, doing anything but killing someone. We don't know anything about other dimensions, so the sky's the limit.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Thunder God from another dimension. Way more believable than gamma rays, which destroy living tissue as a rule, doing anything but killing someone. We don't know anything about other dimensions, so the sky's the limit.

I'm sorry, you could poll the public and you'd never get that reaction. Regardless, the common person doesn't know what exactly a gamma ray does, but they know it to exist or would connect it to some other kind of "ray". They know Thunder Gods don't exist. That's the difference.

 

[Chewy]

They know gamma rays exist. They also know that giant green monsters don't exist.

 

[Rock Sexton]

They know gamma rays exist. They also know that giant green monsters don't exist.

.............but the two are not benign. If they know of gamma rays, it lends to the believability of Hulk. It's not like he's just a green monster running around with no back story.

 

[Chewy]

... and it's not like Thor's a Norse God running around with no backstory

 

[SuperFerret]

Fantasy is not more or less believable than science fiction. There is only the tiniest of differences between the two and most people (i.e. the public) don't know or care enough to determine the difference.

This question is silly, if the public accepts that a man can build a suit of hi-tech armor, or get hit with radiation and turn into a hulking man-child, or actually be an alien who gets his superpowers from Earth's yellow sun, then they can accept a thunder god from a mythical land, ESPECIALLY if they've seen a movie that shows all that in some detail and establish him as a superhero. Once that's done, the public won't blink an eye if he shows up with other superheroes, no matter who they are.

 

[Rock Sexton]

... and it's not like Thor's a Norse God running around with no backstory

You're putting words in my mouth............. let's focus here for a minute............Thor's back story isn't explained by technological means like all the other characters being set up. His power comes from being immortal and a magic hammer. There's sorcery and magic in the dimension where he's from.

 

[SuperFerret]

You're putting words in my mouth............. let's focus here for a minute............Thor's back story isn't explained by technological means like all the other characters being set up. His power comes from being immortal and a magic hammer. There's sorcery and magic in the dimension where he's from.

So?

 

[Rock Sexton]

Fantasy is not more or less believable than science fiction. There is only the tiniest of differences between the two and most people (i.e. the public) don't know or care enough to determine the difference.

So you have a whole crew at Marvel and directors in Jon Favreau and Kenneth Branaugh who are sensitive to the complexity - but to you there's virtually no isssue?

This question is silly, if the public accepts that a man can build a suit of hi-tech armor, or get hit with radiation and turn into a hulking man-child, or actually be an alien who gets his superpowers from Earth's yellow sun, then they can accept a thunder god from a mythical land, ESPECIALLY if they've seen a movie that shows all that in some detail and establish him as a superhero. Once that's done, the public won't blink an eye if he shows up with other superheroes, no matter who they are.

I already stated this. The Thor film is integral to the acceptability on the part of the average movie viewer come Avengers. You can't deny that all the films so far (Hulk, IM, and soon to be Captain America), were all technology with no elements of magic or interdimensionality and Thor is absolutely not. I've yet to see any quality examples of a film that has managed to be successful while merging the two.

 

[Chewy]

I didn't put words in your mouth, I responded to your post. And Thor isn't immortal. I'd also like to point out that there isn't a technological explanation for a man surviving being frozen in the Arctic for 70 years.

Also, sorcery and magic existing in the dimension he comes from is not going to be an issue, as sorcery and magic exist in the dimension Avengers takes place in and Thor will be the viewer's introduction to that. Sorcery and magic existing in a fictional universe isn't a problem and only becomes one when it isn't handled properly.

 

[Rock Sexton]

So?

.............. .............so none of the other SHIELD characters share that in common. Fish out of water scenario. The movies so far have been science fiction, not fantasy fiction. They're rooted in technology related principles as Favreau has pointed out.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I didn't put words in your mouth, I responded to your post. And Thor isn't immortal. I'd also like to point out that there isn't a technological explanation for a man surviving being frozen in the Arctic for 70 years.

I don't know how else to make this more crystal clear to you - most of the things were see aren't possible regardless. Yet, when they're attached to "technology" the acceptability levels are higher and have much more of a connection to "reality" .......... both IM and Hulk managed to keep within reality's reach.

Also, sorcery and magic existing in the dimension he comes from is not going to be an issue, as sorcery and magic exist in the dimension Avengers takes place in and Thor will be the viewer's introduction to that. Sorcery and magic existing in a fictional universe isn't a problem and only becomes one when it isn't handled properly.

I'm with you 100%. That's why I said it's a delicate situation.

 

[Chewy]

I don't know how else to make this more crystal clear to you - most of the things were see aren't possible regardless. Yet, when they're attached to "technology" the acceptability levels are higher and have much more of a connection to "reality" .......... both IM and Hulk managed to keep within reality's reach.

Neither was connected to reality... both are stretches and are escapist fare. As much as people like to claim that there is "reality" in movies like Iron Man, TIH, or TDK, there isn't. There's believability to it, and that is entirely credited to the filmmakers. Just as the level of believability to Thor will rest squarely on the shoulders of the filmmakers.

 

[SuperFerret]

So you have a whole crew at Marvel and directors in Jon Favreau and Kenneth Branaugh who are sensitive to the complexity - but to you there's virtually no isssue?

To me there is no issue, only people who are making an issue by questioning it all. Read Agent 194's post. He's absolutely right, if they just come out and have Iron Man, the Hulk, Captain America and Thor standing side by side and just being the Avengers as they've been for years in print, never questioning Thor's magical roots, Banner's gamma radiation anomaly and Captain America's real chances of surviving that long in the ice. They do that, and nobody but those already skeptical will think twice.

I already stated this. The Thor film is integral to the acceptability on the part of the average movie viewer come Avengers. You can't deny that all the films so far (Hulk, IM, and soon to be Captain America), were all technology with no elements of magic or interdimensionality and Thor is absolutely not. I've yet to see any quality examples of a film that has managed to be successful while merging the two.

You ever hear about Harry Potter? They're these stories set in the modern day about a school for wizardry. They've been quite successful movies from what I've seen.

 

[Rock Sexton]

To me there is no issue, only people who are making an issue by questioning it all. Read Agent 194's post. He's absolutely right, if they just come out and have Iron Man, the Hulk, Captain America and Thor standing side by side and just being the Avengers as they've been for years in print, never questioning Thor's magical roots, Banner's gamma radiation anomaly and Captain America's real chances of surviving that long in the ice. They do that, and nobody but those already skeptical will think twice.

You ever hear about Harry Potter? They're these stories set in the modern day about a school for wizardry. They've been quite successful movies from what I've seen.

Harry Potter did not introduce technology. Terrible example. It was all fantasy fiction, not science fiction. It's theme is nothing even remotely close to that of Hulk or IM.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Neither was connected to reality... both are stretches and are escapist fare. As much as people like to claim that there is "reality" in movies like Iron Man, TIH, or TDK, there isn't. There's believability to it, and that is entirely credited to the filmmakers. Just as the level of believability to Thor will rest squarely on the shoulders of the filmmakers.

Think there's a chance of a portal being invented?

 

[SuperFerret]

Harry Potter did not introduce technology. Terrible example. It was all fantasy fiction, not science fiction. It's theme is nothing even remotely close to that of Hulk or IM.

Harry Potter was set "our world". "Our world" has technology, the Potter stories ADDED magic to the technology.

And please, I made two points in my last post. Address them, lest I leave believing I'm right.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Harry Potter was set "our world". "Our world" has technology, the Potter stories ADDED magic to the technology.

And please, I made two points in my last post. Address them, lest I leave believing I'm right.

Still a terrible example. The Potter world was a world within a world. It was an escape from reality and technology into a world of fantasy, magic, and sorcerer. Apparently you missed that.

I've addressed all of your points.

 

[RaZaTrOn]

It isn't a terrible example because what you just explain mirrors Thor to some extent.
Asgard can be a world within our world can it not? An escape from reality and technology into a world of fantasy and magic.
Thor, like Potter comes back to our world every so often and uses magic Thor uses a Hammer to get places, Harry uses a magic bus.

Have addressed all of your points?