The Official 'Thor Rate & Review' thread - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't agree, but it'd make a nice change. :cwink:

Whether TDK is overrated (a subjective term as it is) is basically irrelevant now - rightly or wrongly it has created a benchmark in many critics' minds and unless they see something much better that benchmark will be there for a while. The film that could really adversely affect, of course, is TDKR.

TDK shouldn't be a benchmark though. And i'm not talking quality here.

TDK and a film like Thor should just never, ever, ever be compared. They are totally different beasts.

I mean what? Do these people think all superhero movies should be all grimdark and depressing? Should have attempts at socio-political commentary?

I've seen it first hand. "Well so and so movie didn't try to say anything deep and meaningful like The Dark Knight did"

Errr... who gives a **** if it's trying to say something deep and meaningful or not?

But saying all that, I don't even think The Dark Knight is even great on a technical, filmmaking level. The editing is truly horrendous, for example. And it breaks the rule of "show, don't tell" way too often.
 
Or Superman, which Nolan is neither writing or directing yet the fans act as though he's directly responsible for it.

If Superman's good, Nolan will get the praise. If it's bad, Snyder will get the blame.

I actually suspect Nolan's involvement in it has been exaggerated to create anticipation.
 
JAK®;20268189 said:
Unless the fans don't like what they hear, in which case it's all Snyder.
and/or Goyer
 
I care more about a movie like Thor because it attempts to capture my imagination. Nolan's TDK doesn't do that for me. In fact it restricts it.
Agreed! I got more nejoyment out of Thor in the end.

I mean, yeah, the joker was fantastic, but other than that, I don't see where anything was special. The Joker made that movie, and it felt more about the Joker than it did Batman when looking at the movie afterwards.

I don't hate TDK, and I think it's the best batman film to date, but as I said, it's just very overrated and is not at the top of my list. It's sad to see The Man Of Steel being looked at as a Nolan project, when it's not.

I'm not bashing the Nolan team, but I'm just sick of it and it's not just because I'm a Marvel guy. I'm just more excited to see all the Marvel films coming out. They capture the essence of the character's and not try to chnange things to fit into the real world. the Spider-Man 2 felt real because that's who Peter parker is. He has fantastic powers, but at the heart of it all he's like you or me. That's one of the reasons Spider-Man 2 remains my favorite comic book movie adaption.

TDK has plagued the comic book film genre, if you ask me. It's a good movie, but not one that should be put on a pedestal, IMO.
 
I found the film to be very entertaining. My inner fanboy was screaming like a little girl through the whole thing. But like Iron Man 1 and 2, and The Incredible Hulk I feel it was missing something though I still haven't figured out what the something is.

Also the action scenes aside from the one with Thor fighting the frost giants were disappointing. Will a marvel director ever pull a Sam Raimi and create their own Spider-man train sequence?
 
If Superman's good, Nolan will get the praise. If it's bad, Snyder will get the blame.

I actually suspect Nolan's involvement in it has been exaggerated to create anticipation.
I imagine he got Goyer the gig and okayed the director choice and that's about it.
 
TDK shouldn't be a benchmark though. And i'm not talking quality here.

TDK and a film like Thor should just never, ever, ever be compared. They are totally different beasts.

I mean what? Do these people think all superhero movies should be all grimdark and depressing? Should have attempts at socio-political commentary?

I've seen it first hand. "Well so and so movie didn't try to say anything deep and meaningful like The Dark Knight did"

Errr... who gives a **** if it's trying to say something deep and meaningful or not?

Well, like I said, whether the benchmark is valid or not doesn't matter anymore. In many critics' minds it's there. Frankly if it encourages a few comic book directors to attempt to add a bit more depth to their films just to compete I won't complain.

And whatever you say about TDK... we're STILL talking about it. At length.
 
I care more about a movie like Thor because it attempts to capture my imagination. Nolan's TDK doesn't do that for me. In fact it restricts it.

Well said. It's so busy trying to have some pretense of being a deep, meaningful film it completely forgets to be... fun.

And throwing in some stupid little one liners and scenes of kids watching cars getting blown up doesn't = fun.
 
Well, like I said, whether the benchmark is valid or not doesn't matter anymore. In many critics' minds it's there. Frankly if it encourages a few comic book directors to attempt to add a bit more depth to their films just to compete I won't complain.

And whatever you say about TDK... we're STILL talking about it. At length.

Yea... I said TDK tries to be deep. It isn't deep, or subtle, or intelligent, in the slightest.

But whatevs.
 
I found TDK a lot of fun. To me, seeing how these larger than life character might function in a world closely resembling mine is fun and exciting. If anything the whole 'realism' outlook is open-minded because it doesn't restrict itself to being merely light and breezy. It made an effort to imagine something else.

But I digress.... this is a Thor thread.
 
Last edited:
Well said. It's so busy trying to have some pretense of being a deep, meaningful film it completely forgets to be... fun.
Exactly! I'm sick of people wanting comic book films to be dark and gritty. Take Spider-Man, for example. You have people who have claimed to have read the comics saying that it should be dark and gritty. ummmmm...huh?! Spider-Man is NOT a dark character. Yeah, he's had some dark stories such as Kraven's Last Hunt, Spider-Man: Reign, etc, but those were story arcs. They weren't permanent.

Like I said, I liked TDK, but my enjoyment of the film has weakened since July 18th 2008. I wouldn't say it doesn't provide fun, but it gets less fun with repeat viewings, iMO. I think Marvel is top king right now in terms of comic book films and I'm just REALLY REALLY loooking foward to the future of Marvel. They're stronger than ever in terms of the film world thanks to X-Men, Spider-Man, Iron Man, Thor, etc.
 
JAK®;20268257 said:
Yeah, because we're talking about how annoying it is when it's brought up.

It amounts to the same thing.
 
Nolan and Batman hate really??The reviewer is right it is not TDK it is a far departure from that but that is not a knock on the film. TDK is what it is the movie all other movies in it's genre is going to be compared to for the next several years. The reason why because it made nearly half billion dollars in the theaters alone. Heath Ledger was great as the Joker but he did not carry that film to all the success it accomplished.
 
yea thor and the gl are the movies i am looking forward to the most this year. everytime thor did something or i saw saw something i was like epic, then epic, then oh ****. i really got to see alot of stuff i always wanted to see come to life. the same will be for gl when it comes out.

i mean holy **** guys we just saw thor in a live action movie. we saw loki, we saw odin, we saw a kirby looking asgard, heimdall was also badass looking. idris was a very good heimdall. this movie just really made me happy.
 
Nolan and Batman hate really??The reviewer is right it is not TDK it is a far departure from that but that is not a knock on the film. TDK is what it is the movie all other movies in it's genre is going to be compared to for the next several years. The reason why because it made nearly half billion dollars in the theaters alone. Heath Ledger was great as the Joker but he did not carry that film to all the success it accomplished.
Surely that would mean we should be talking about Avatar instead, because it made 2 Billion dollars?
 
Nolan and Batman hate really??The reviewer is right it is not TDK it is a far departure from that but that is not a knock on the film. TDK is what it is the movie all other movies in it's genre is going to be compared to for the next several years. The reason why because it made nearly half billion dollars in the theaters alone. Heath Ledger was great as the Joker but he did not carry that film to all the success it accomplished.
It was a great Batman film, but I'm sorry, the Joker is was the most gripping part of that movie. Like I said, I'm excited about TDKR, but definitely not as much as the Marvel films.

if it wasn't the Joker, then how come that's all people talk about? You don't see anybody talking about Batman other than the fans who have already praised Heath to no end.
 
It was a great Batman film, but I'm sorry, the Joker is was the most gripping part of that movie. Like I said, I'm excited about TDKR, but definitely not as much as the Marvel films.

if it wasn't the Joker, then how come that's all people talk about? You don't see anybody talking about Batman other than the fans who have already praised Heath to no end.

The Joker is the most famous comic book villain of all time, more loved than most superheroes. I have no problem with him being the most talked about part of the movie.

I'll certainly remember Thor a lot more for Loki.
 
Agreed! I got more nejoyment out of Thor in the end.

I mean, yeah, the joker was fantastic, but other than that, I don't see where anything was special. The Joker made that movie, and it felt more about the Joker than it did Batman when looking at the movie afterwards.

I don't hate TDK, and I think it's the best batman film to date, but as I said, it's just very overrated and is not at the top of my list. It's sad to see The Man Of Steel being looked at as a Nolan project, when it's not.

I'm not bashing the Nolan team, but I'm just sick of it and it's not just because I'm a Marvel guy. I'm just more excited to see all the Marvel films coming out. They capture the essence of the character's and not try to chnange things to fit into the real world. the Spider-Man 2 felt real because that's who Peter parker is. He has fantastic powers, but at the heart of it all he's like you or me. That's one of the reasons Spider-Man 2 remains my favorite comic book movie adaption.

TDK has plagued the comic book film genre, if you ask me. It's a good movie, but not one that should be put on a pedestal, IMO.

Hmm. Pretty sure in Thor they say talk about how mythology and magic is just science we don't understand like 5 different times in order to make sure it meshes with Iron Man. As for Spider-Man 2..I don't follow the comparison. What you said is irrelevant..you kind of just said it's cool that they don't shoe horn realism into it, and instead focused on the characters..but those two things aren't mutually exclusive..like at all, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Focusing on characters doesn't mean abandoning realism, or vice versa. Furthermore, realism certainly wasn't sacrificed in the case of Spider-Man 2 for any specific character development..or at least I can't think of any example of that. As for The Dark Knight..it's on a pedestal because critics and audience agree that it should be (see RT, IMDB, and box office results). If you think there's nothing special about that film beyond the Joker..I'm not sure you understand it fully. Regardless..why are you even bringing that film into a conversation about Thor? Your praising a film for not sticking to realism, but at the same time a movie like Thor could not have possibly been realistic (being about Norse gods after all) so again, I think the point is moot.

Anyway, as far as I remember from a few years ago, you're a fan of Spider-Man 3....so maybe we just have a fundamental difference in taste.:huh:
 
JAK®;20268411 said:
Surely that would mean we should be talking about Avatar instead, because it made 2 Billion dollars?

It's kind of funny that both Avatar and TDK are billion dollar generators, but I just wasn't that impressed.

Anyways, didn't help to make this Thor thread about TDK .... I just get sick of seeing critics and bloggers use it as a benchmark. As stated previously, these are two very different films.
 
Hmm. Pretty sure in Thor they say talk about how mythology and magic is just science we don't understand like 5 different times in order to make sure it meshes with Iron Man.

They actually did it one better. I remember I kind of cringed at the initial trailer when it had Thor explaining magic as science. However, in the actual movie it comes out during a conversation between Selvig and Jane, but in a much wittier fashion. I can't remember the words exactly, but Jane quoted a famous writer then Selvig mentions Science-Fiction followed by Jane's quip about Science-Fact. I loved it. Just a great exchange.
 
Man the score seriously made this movie so intense for me. I can't stop thinking about it.
 
For me the 15 minutes wouldn't have just been focused on Thor becoming more humble. It would have also included a tad bit more action and some more scenes with Loki too.

To be honest, I just enjoyed the movie so much I wished it was longer, I wanted more. :woot:

Ah, I see now. That's fair enough. And Rock is correct. I definitely would have liked to see more, but that's not a knock on it.

You may be right on this.

One scene that had me cracking up was when Thor brings in Dr. Selvig drunk off his ass. "He drank, He fought, he made his ancestors proud". :woot:

There were alot of great quotes. I loved the fish out of water stuff.
I think I got the biggest laugh when they backed into Thor at the hospital parking lot. When he appeared through the back widnow and they hit him. :lmao:

"I need sustenance!"

And when he was tied down to the bed.

"Impossible."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"