Carlo Comicus
Sidekick
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2007
- Messages
- 2,249
- Reaction score
- 64
- Points
- 73
The script has been rewritten. In fact that's kind of what the entire article is about...
For you this is a full rewrite? I don't think.
The script has been rewritten. In fact that's kind of what the entire article is about...
For you this is a full rewrite? I don't think.
Thor movie: A real Asgardian God of Thunder. Whe see Asgard, Odin, Loki, Hel and everything that makes Thor... Thor.
The Avengers movie: Thor is considered a hero, but he's also considered a nutcase for saying that he's a Norse God. SHIELD belives he's just a superhuman (It would be cool if they said he's "just another mutant") and the public believes he's just a superhero. Specially because he don't go public talking about Asgard and things like that. He's a silent, watchfull protector. At the ending (Or in a sequel), the Avengers confirm he's a real God.
They've got quite a challenge ahead to bring a Norse God into the "realistic" world they created in Iron Man. All the other characters can be explained in the realm of science to a degree, but to throw in religion and gods is another matter. I look forward to seeing how they pull it off.
Exactly. I hate the realism argument. Its a ****ing comic book for christ sake.
Yeah, but com'on... there is a such thing as the suspension of disbelief. It is necessary for the film to sweep people up. Moreover, were are not actually talking about a comic book. It may be based on a CB, but it is most definitely a live action film. That being the case, and since IM was depicted as a sci-fi action film, there is a crossing of genres with Thor being a fantasy epic. You can't just mash those together like they do in comic books (imagine Gimlee hauling a mini-gun to battle the orcs in LOTR, while Aragorn draws a light saber. Or how about the Terminator summoning a lightning storm or growing 50 feet tall and sprouting giant bat-wings... these would be absurd). These are extreme examples, but the point is that you can't just cast the suspension of disbelief aside. A theme has to be struck, and that theme has to be honored...
Thus the dilemma of crossing IM and Thor, with two distinct themes to honor. It most certainly can be accomplished, but it is not a small matter if the goal is to have a successful film and a successful franchise. Without care the film could look like Beastmaster 2 or a Quentin Tarantino camp film.
Exactly. I hate the realism argument. Its a ****ing comic book for christ sake.
You can't just mash those together like they do in comic books (imagine Gimlee hauling a mini-gun to battle the orcs in LOTR, while Aragorn draws a light saber... these would be absurd).
you ever heard of the Q continuum? Star Trek did a beautiful job of bring in even more God like presence into their sci-fi world. The Q could shift planetary alignment, travel in and out of time, and change shape. How did the writers at star trek try to explain this? they didn't ,the characters knew how such things could be done but had no idea how someone could do it. They chalked to being out of there scope of understanding.
I think that would be pretty awesome actually. t:Originally Posted by Rich Santoro
You can't just mash those together like they do in comic books (imagine Gimlee hauling a mini-gun to battle the orcs in LOTR, while Aragorn draws a light saber... these would be absurd).
I think that would be pretty awesome actually. t:
That is an excellent point... however, Q was not a central character in need of development, backstory, motivation, and a personal relationship with the viewers. Granted, there were several episodes with Q, and some actually got into some personal touches... but they were more like the Beyonders, compared to Viking warriors. I do agree that some aspects can be simply left to "beyond current understanding" but I stand by my original point.
Gods are gods regardless of what level they are if you wanna chalk it up to science you can. Everything that is in a Thor is in our realm of today's science, nothing is unexplainable.How they became to be known as gods, at marvel they say the Asgard once lived and visited on Earth. There natural powers would have easily led to them being gods in the eyes of ancient Norsemen. Asgard is realm oustide of our own you can chalk that up to intera-dimensional world(there is a current theory in physics that believes the big bang was caused by the collison of two seprate universerses or dimensions that collided with each other). The rainbow bridge or bifrost is essence a wormhole that connects two points in space(something theorized by Albert Einstien, in the same book he theorized about a blackhole that we now know to be true). The Asgard's strength n powers can be chalked up to them being from a dimension outisde of our own thereby the laws of physics which govern are world do not imply to them as in the Q continuum( also an theorized by scientist). Reason you leave this stuff out and chalk it up to beyond our current understanding cause it is to the masses.
You make my point exactly... I have even commented on the elements that you have listed out in other posts (other dimensions, worm-holes, etc). Moreover, because it is the "masses", is the very reason that the film ought not just let the details hang out there without any attempt to flesh things out... Specifically because Thor is a character that needs to be related to on a personal level as the protaganist (rather than the antaganist, which is Q... and the Borg for that matter... rooted entirley in science, but there was no need to delve into their back-ground since they were the emerging threat) is why something to the effect of what you indicated needs to be shared, in some manner, with the movie-goers... I am not saying that a large chunk of the film needs to be deticated to sciencifying the relationship of Asgard to Earth, but some mechanism should be used to effectively bridge the gap between the sci-fi action genre set in our modern world, merging with fantasy epic that originates in another world / reality altogether...
I think it would be a mistake to just chalk it up to some implied explanation that it is all just beyond understanding.
I understand it but none of that should be explained in a Thor movie cause I wouldn't explain how I walked or talked cause I just do it I don't think about it. In avengers movie fine let Stark spend his time trying to logically explain why a Norse God of Thunder is fighting alongside of him or even in existance. I don't know why people worried about how Thor fits into Iron Man world. You need to be asking yourself how does the Mandarin fit into Iron man world cause last time I remember Mandarin had ten power rings that were all magic. If there not going to include that alot of fanboys are gonna be really upset.
Yeah, but com'on... there is a such thing as the suspension of disbelief. It is necessary for the film to sweep people up. Moreover, were are not actually talking about a comic book. It may be based on a CB, but it is most definitely a live action film. That being the case, and since IM was depicted as a sci-fi action film, there is a crossing of genres with Thor being a fantasy epic. You can't just mash those together like they do in comic books (imagine Gimlee hauling a mini-gun to battle the orcs in LOTR, while Aragorn draws a light saber. Or how about the Terminator summoning a lightning storm or growing 50 feet tall and sprouting giant bat-wings... these would be absurd). These are extreme examples, but the point is that you can't just cast the suspension of disbelief aside. A theme has to be struck, and that theme has to be honored...
Thus the dilemma of crossing IM and Thor, with two distinct themes to honor. It most certainly can be accomplished, but it is not a small matter if the goal is to have a successful film and a successful franchise. Without care the film could look like Beastmaster 2 or a Quentin Tarantino camp film.
I don't think ancient Norsemen talked like Shakspearean actors. As shakspearean is stylized way of speech that was created long after the Norse men mythios had been died out due to Christian influence. As far as casting of Thor goes , the best rendition of Herclues was played by Kevin Sorbo who is hardly Hercluesh . In all fairness Stan Lee really ripped the whole idea of Thor from there mythology.