Disney's Thor?! Some people are complaining that Thor feels like a kids movie!

[BigThor]

^ This

 

[The Morningstar]

Wait... Spider-Man punched The Flash? When? How? Brain explodes.

 

[Zionite]

No, they're clearly not the same, one is a human while the other is a 10 ft tall otherworldly monster.

First Good piont youve made.I concede the Flash comparison was a bad one.I still back my piont though.A better comparison would be Spiderman superpunching Goblin/Venom.
I notice you didnt answer the rest of my post especially the Loki part.

Zionite, you're certainly entitled to your opinion of the movie, but I'm not sure what you're playing at. If you didn't think they displayed a respective level of power for Thor in the movie, then fine. However it seems that most people disagree, which is also fine. You're not really doing yourself any favors by accusing people of lying and such. It's just a movie, either you were entertained, or you weren't. Hopefully you were entertained.

First off Im not palying at anything.Big Thor is debatin an observation I made whilst watching it.Which was fine, till he got a bit rude and started lying to prove his piont.
And you are assuming most people disagree with me.
And Yes I was entertained.

 

[TX85]

I haven't seen the movie yet,But I assume some people(mostly the GA of course)expect these movies to be grimdark/all serious to be for"Adults"!?,Plus they may assume Thor is exactly like his self in the Norse mythology form in which would definitely be damn grim dark as a movie!

 

[The Morningstar]

I doubt barely anyone in the GA knows anything about Norse mythology. It's pretty obscure. It isn't like Greek mythology.

 

[kedrell]

Well, that's the risk when you don't play safe. Doesn't mean you mustn't try it or that safe is the only way to go.

I'd say the key is to know when to risk it and when to play it safe. Ya gotta know when to hold'em, know when to fold'em, know when to walk away and know when to run(sorry, got a Kenny Rogers flashback).

The point is that when you're holding on by your fingernails you don't go waving your arms around.

 

[BigThor]

First off Im not palying at anything.Big Thor is debatin an observation I made whilst watching it.Which was fine, till he got a bit rude and started lying to prove his piont.
And you are assuming most people disagree with me.
And Yes I was entertained.

Yep, that's exactly what happened.

 

[Tony Stark]

I doubt barely anyone in the GA knows anything about Norse mythology. It's pretty obscure. It isn't like Greek mythology.

Only because Greek mythology was the progenitor of Roman mythology and hence Norse mythology. Also because Norse mythology was only partially captured in rune stones scattered about northern Europe, but most of the tales were told by campfire and varried from region to region.

 

[Silvermoth]

I think people seem to think that when a movie isn't a kids film it has to be grim dark. I don't think when people are saying Thor is a Disney film they mean they want him to talk with a growl and hang out in dark alleyways. They just don't want to feel like they're being talked down to.

An excellent example are the Harry Potter films. Movies we can all enjoy that don't feel like they're trying to sell toys to us. Pixar, again, lovely amazing film. Kids films yes but enjoyed by everyone.

Just because some people aren't up for the pop references or the bright colours doesn't mean they're 13 year old boys jonesying for violence and porn nor does it mean they have no love in their lives. I adore films like Harry Potter, Pixar movies and Studio Ghibli movies but I still thought Thor was a bit too childish and lacked a certain impact.

 

[kedrell]

I didn't once feel like I was being talked down to in this film.

 

[The Morningstar]

I didn't feel like I was being talked down to, at all really. Which in all honesty, was surprising. The only real blatant exposition dumping was in Odin's opening narration.

I think the best example of this was when Loki and Frigga were talking about the Odinsleep. I mentioned in another thread, that could have been a horrible exposition dump "Well the Odin sleep is bla bla bla" in a totally unnatural way. But the converstation Loki and Frigga had seemed entirely natural, just like two people talking. And it didn't spoon feed to us what the Odinsleep was, it just alluded to it being a natural cycle of Odin and that this time it went wrong in some way.

Thor did well with this throughout.

 

[El Payaso]

That's true, I just feel Ang was the wrong person for that film, and there was alot of potential there, but I never felt Bruce Banner as a character, and that was the real failing of that film. Bill Bixby is the measuring stick for Bruce/David Banner, because he gave so much character to Bruce that it allowed the Hulk to just be a monster. Bana was a great actor, but he was given nothing to work with.

I think Ang Lee wanted an Ang lee movie and Marvel wanted a Marvel movie. Back in 2003 that was a problem. The result was a bizarre mix of both Ang Lee and a average Marvel movie, which never ended up matching well. Now, that's not a problem because even Kenneth Branagh dissolved himself and dissapeared into the Marvel formula.


But this reason or the other my point was a different one entirely: not every origin film has been forlmulaistic.

No doubt there, it's a huge achievement, and it's still very watchable even in these effects laden times. Heck the flying in that movie looks better to me than Superman Returns.

If the new Superman is half as good as that movie was, it will be a great achievement.

No. If it's half as good then it will be that: half as good. So-so.

I'd say the key is to know when to risk it and when to play it safe. Ya gotta know when to hold'em, know when to fold'em, know when to walk away and know when to run(sorry, got a Kenny Rogers flashback).

The point is that when you're holding on by your fingernails you don't go waving your arms around.

Nobody knows when taking risks is going to work. That's why it's called risky. But if you're an artist you liove for artistic risk. If you're a crafstmen then you'll do just what they tell you or what's supposed to be done.

________________________


Back on topic:

Yeah, I could say Thor worked for children but I felt Spiderman 1 to be a complete Disney movie.

 

[The Morningstar]

Nobody knows when taking risks is going to work. That's why it's called risky. But if you're an artist you liove for artistic risk. If you're a crafstmen then you'll do just what they tell you or what's supposed to be done.

That's true. But I felt there was some artistic integrity to Branaugh's work here. You could tell it wasn't just some hired gun.

And the thing is, it's Thor, he's not well known, his mythos is "out there". You can't really take massive risks with a movie like this where it has a 150million dollar budget.

I expect the same from Green Lantern.

Both films will be kinda forumulaic, because the "dressing" is so outrageous.

 

[kedrell]

Nobody knows when taking risks is going to work. That's why it's called risky. But if you're an artist you liove for artistic risk. If you're a crafstmen then you'll do just what they tell you or what's supposed to be done.

Yes, there's that. But movies aren't just art. They're product. Especially summer blockbusters. There's nothing wrong with fine craftsmanship. Art has it's place as well. It's a balancing act but I can hardly fault anyone who sinks hundreds of millions of dollars into a venture(which is by it's very nature risky) from hedging their bets.

 

[TomPiltoff]

About the time Bev gets undressed behind the curtain the woman said, "this isn't a kids movie!" well DUH it's rated PG not G.

... [face_palm]

 

[Kurosawa]

I think that it comes off more like a kids movie because it's based a little closer to the Silver-Age Thor comics than some of the other Marvel movies-although Iron Man's origin was practically perfect as well. Despite how edgy people talk like SA Marvel was, a lot of their heroes still had the same positive, noble motives as DC's more iconic type characters, and Thor was the most DC-like of Marvel's heroes once you got past the long hair and the Shakespearean dialogue. He still believed strongly in honor and decency, he still cared a great deal for people, he had his conflicts but was not controlled by them like Spider-Man and the FF were.

 

[Vartha]

... [face_palm]

heh That's what the EX and I did. lol You'd think if you saw a pg rating you'd double check the NAME.....or get better glasses. lol

 

[nocomics]

I wouldn't call it a Disney type movie,but I wouldn't call it hardcore neither. It was an average movie imo, and thats it. Could of been better? Hell ya, it just felt to me hashed together and forced. Could of it been worse? Sure it could.
Far as arguing feats of strenght and comparing his feats to Spiderman/Supes is trivial. Its how the writers/directors perceive and translate that to their 'story' and in this case it wasn't really their motives to show Thors 'Feats' of str just his overal abilities;hammer,flying,weather skills,fighting abilities. Whereas in maybe SPidey they tried showing his abilities differently and same as Supes. It just depends on what they are trying to achieve with the characters.
Personally, I would of rather seen Thor a darker tone and the battles with Destroyer/Loki more drawn out and more personal;especially with Loki.

 

[TX85]

the battles with Destroyer/Loki more drawn out and more personal;especially with Loki.

Well I agree with you there,I think they saved Thor vs Loki being more personal&way more bad a** for Avengers!!

 

[Miken Ayers]

I never got the argument as to character x is better than character y since x can beat y in a fight. If Marvel wanted Thor to be stronger than Superman with or without the hammer they'd simply write him that way.

That would be like if someone said no one could beat Batman. I could turn around and create a character in ten seconds that knows everything Batman knows except he also has alien tech and was taught by wizards.

 

[BigThor]

Far as arguing feats of strenght and comparing his feats to Spiderman/Supes is trivial. Its how the writers/directors perceive and translate that to their 'story' and in this case it wasn't really their motives to show Thors 'Feats' of str just his overal abilities;hammer,flying,weather skills,fighting abilities. Whereas in maybe SPidey they tried showing his abilities differently and same as Supes. It just depends on what they are trying to achieve with the characters.

Exactly, besides, now that his genereal abilities have been shown the writers have much more room to showcase his strength in the sequel.

 

[hatebox]

Nobody knows when taking risks is going to work. That's why it's called risky. But if you're an artist you liove for artistic risk. If you're a crafstmen then you'll do just what they tell you or what's supposed to be done.

A craftsmen is someone who strives to be better at their chosen art - I think 'journeyman' is the word you're looking for, someone who does whatever job comes along as they're told.

 

[kedrell]

I think that it comes off more like a kids movie because it's based a little closer to the Silver-Age Thor comics than some of the other Marvel movies-although Iron Man's origin was practically perfect as well. Despite how edgy people talk like SA Marvel was, a lot of their heroes still had the same positive, noble motives as DC's more iconic type characters, and Thor was the most DC-like of Marvel's heroes once you got past the long hair and the Shakespearean dialogue. He still believed strongly in honor and decency, he still cared a great deal for people, he had his conflicts but was not controlled by them like Spider-Man and the FF were.

But the whole "arrogant guy who needs to learn humility" aspect of the character(which I believe was in Thor from day one in comics...feel free to correct me if I got that wrong) is as far from what a DC character was as you could get. DC characters(at least of the time) didn't have foibles. That was kinda the whole point of what Marvel was doing differently, wasn't it? I mean aside from making their heroes 3-dimensional people first(or at least potentially 3-dimensional) and superheroes second.

 

[JAK®]

Being closer to something doesn't mean exactly the same.

 

[kedrell]

You know, I'm really starting to rethink the whole "they played it safe" idea with regards to this film. They may have hedged their bets here and there where they could but really that this film was ever even greenlit is one of the most compelling examples of not playing it safe that I can think of.