So, Like, What Up With Balder?

[elizah72]

...So,do they call him Balder because he wears a rug?



Er,sorry.....*backs out of thread slowly*

HAAHHAHAHAHA! Cheap joke but funny!

 

[chamber-music]

I think Merlin, Doctor Who, Tormented actor Tom Hopper would make a good Balder.

 

[Lady_Sif]

I am beginning to wonder if Tyr will wind up being in the land of the dead with other dead warriors, so maybe we'll see Balder as well there. Though there's been nothing about casting the character as far as I know.

Uh, if Balder is dead and already in Hela's realm, wouldn't that mean Surtur really needs like 4 entire years to make Ragnarök happen? He is big, he is slow.

I never cared for Balder in the comics myself, although he is not a bad character actually. I like him over Tyr in fact. Balder just needs to be there for making Ragnarök happen. It will be tricky to come up with an explanation where he has been all the time.

Maybe he is going to appear in TDW, beeing a character in the background. So, when they need him for Ragnarök which is prolly going to take place in the third movie, they pull him out like a white rabbit and tell us he was there already all the time

 

[jaqua99]

Uh, if Balder is dead and already in Hela's realm, wouldn't that mean Surtur really needs like 4 entire years to make Ragnarök happen? He is big, he is slow.

I never cared for Balder in the comics myself, although he is not a bad character actually. I like him over Tyr in fact. Balder just needs to be there for making Ragnarök happen. It will be tricky to come up with an explanation where he has been all the time.

Maybe he is going to appear in TDW, beeing a character in the background. So, when they need him for Ragnarök which is prolly going to take place in the third movie, they pull him out like a white rabbit and tell us he was there already all the time

Ragnarok in the MCU, I bet Loki will be the trigger.

and I always hated balder. I thought he sucked in the comics, and to be flat out honest, whenever I read Thor, and I get to a page with Balder, I just skim through that now haha.

 

[Donar]

Ragnarok in the MCU, I bet Loki will be the trigger.

and I always hated balder. I thought he sucked in the comics, and to be flat out honest, whenever I read Thor, and I get to a page with Balder, I just skim through that now haha.

Man, glad to know I'm not completely alone on this.
Balder is one of the few Asgardians I have never cared for.

 

[Lady_Sif]

Ragnarok in the MCU, I bet Loki will be the trigger.

and I always hated balder. I thought he sucked in the comics, and to be flat out honest, whenever I read Thor, and I get to a page with Balder, I just skim through that now haha.

Yeah I know. To me he was just THERE standing around, not much of interest. But we agree, that we need him for Ragnarök? Cause Ragnarök is gooooood ... I mean baaaad. hehe.

 

[Flemm]

I think Balder is considered Redundant, as he's kind of Thor Lite.

Yeah, pretty much this, I think. It's not that he can't be cool, it's that, when he is, he's basically Thor. He doesn't fill the sidekick role like The Warriors Three, and you don't need a secondary protagonist in the films, there's not enough space (unlike the comics, where you can tell a lot of different stories over time).

All of that is magnified with Loki being such a big hit in the films. The Thor franchise already has a character who is almost as important as Thor, with his own agenda, etc.

Beyond that, it's a big cast of characters already. I'd rather see Sif get a substantial role and be important, rather than adding somebody new to the mix. She's a noble warrior, a kindred spirit of sorts, to Thor, like Balder, but she can also provide some romantic tension. On the whole, I don't think they really need Balder.

If they end up bringing him in somehow, well, awesome. But... I can see why they wouldn't.

 

[Lady_Sif]

Yeah, pretty much this, I think. It's not that he can't be cool, it's that, when he is, he's basically Thor. He doesn't fill the sidekick role like The Warriors Three, and you don't need a secondary protagonist in the films, there's not enough space (unlike the comics, where you can tell a lot of different stories over time).

All of that is magnified with Loki being such a big hit in the films. The Thor franchise already has a character who is almost as important as Thor, with his own agenda, etc.

Beyond that, it's a big cast of characters already. I'd rather see Sif get a substantial role and be important, rather than adding somebody new to the mix. She's a noble warrior, a kindred spirit of sorts, to Thor, like Balder, but she can also provide some romantic tension. On the whole, I don't think they really need Balder.

If they end up bringing him in somehow, well, awesome. But... I can see why they wouldn't.

Firstly, I agree... The cast is already very big. If they want to do the Ragnarök story it would have to partyl focus on Balder. I'd rather see more focus on Sif like you. Since we need Balder for Ragnarök, how would this still work as a story plot? Don't tell me Sif will have to die there lol. I could rather live with a dead Balder here hehe.

 

[peterparker0077]

I don't think they'll ever get to Ragnarok. I think they'll bring Balder in to take over the throne when Odin is gone, as he does in real legend and in earlier runs of the comic. I think they'll do this so Thor can still be the keeper of Midgard, and not have to focus soley on Asgard. Balder is Thor's superior brother in most earlier writings. His effects could be quite cool as well. ... while we are asking about characters ... where is Enchantress??

 

[metaphysician]

I doubt it. Or rather, I think they will bring in another king. . . but it will be Heimdall, not Balder.