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

[Mr. Earle]

Morningstar,

I'm still trying to find this plot contrivances in Knight that everyone references.

Maybe, I'm bias. But, I'm starting to get bias about Thor because I'm falling in love with the damn film. Go figure.

Its true. The Joker is like a force of nature, an earthquake or something, hitting Gotham and putting everyone to the test. Dent breaks, Bruce perseveres despite what people think and Rachel doesnt understand Bruce's actions.
Its really quite interesting.

I actually watched IM2 last night. It was better than I remembered.

And yea, people who bring up SHIELD and the Avengers was negatives about that movie... I just don't get it. SHIELD didn't even make their presence known until the last act. There was a 5 minute talk about the Avenger Initiative right at the end.

And even if SHIELD did have a heavy presence, which they didn't, it isn't that far out of the realms of possibility that a government secret agency would want a piece of Tony Stark. If it had happened in real life you can bet your life savings that the FBI, CIA or whatever other government agency would be heavily involved in the goings on.

Exactly. In the real world the government would be all over Tony Stark.

And hell, when i heard "now Mr Stark" during the Cap trailer i had a nerdgasm. Why would anyone not like more characters appearing? Nolan's world feels so comics - barren in comparison.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

I really enjoyed the movie, the references and camoes were great. The post credits scene was amazing. I do agree that these Marvel movies are more sequels of one another leading up to the Avengers. I really liked the movie and it told it's own story very well, but also set up many plot points for the Avengers too, it's somewhat like Kevin Smith's View Askewinverse movies, all totally different, but linked together.

 

[The Morningstar]

Yes, Loki was the best performance of the film, but has anyone mentioned how awesome Fandral was? He totally stole any scene he was in, which is what I thought Volstaag would do. Guy did a great job.

And just my opinion, but I don't think they made Loki "bad" enough. You can't have Loki that sympathetic a character imo.

Loki should be sympathetic. I recommend to anyone the 2004 mini series called "Loki" to understand the character of Loki.

Morningstar,

I'm still trying to find this plot contrivances in Knight that everyone references.

Maybe, I'm bias. But, I'm starting to get bias about Thor because I'm falling in love with the damn film. Go figure.

Things like bombs being set up in a hospital and on a boat. Now I know Joker has plenty of people in his pocket, but to the extent that an entire hospital can be rigged to explode with no one knowing? Or a boat in a city wide crisis not having it's engine room checked before packing it out with civilians? Or a bright yellow bus crashing in and out of a bank on a busy street in broad daylight and no one even noticing? To me they are plot contrivances.

Now, I know TDK isn't supposed to be realistic, but it builds a sense of logic in the world it's in. It's psuedo realism, at least. But then they expect the audience to suspend their disbelief for things that according to the established logic and tone of the movie, really don't make sense. I mean they go to great lengths to explain how RICO works (even though they got that wrong too). They explain how China won't extradite one of their own. But then they bust out these fantasy like plot contrivances? It's just a contradiction of the own movies logic. If you're gonna have someone plant a **** ton of explosives in a hospital with no one known... why are you explaining things like China's extradition mentality?

The first time I watched TDK none of these things bothered me. But after repeat viewings these contradictions of the worlds logic and plot devices/contrivances (don't get me started on the bullet scanning thing that is silly even for CSI: Miami) started to really grate on me. Plus, I just think the movie is really sterile and souless.

I don't think the movie is bad, at all. But I just can't overlook these flaws anymore. It seems to me that Nolan was so hellbent on making the movie serious and to have some socio-political message he overlooked these flaws in the "world building" of the movie.

But that's enough of that, this is the Thor thread!

 

[hatebox]

But that's enough of that, this is the Thor thread!

Yup.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

I actually watched IM2 last night. It was better than I remembered.

And yea, people who bring up SHIELD and the Avengers was negatives about that movie... I just don't get it. SHIELD didn't even make their presence known until the last act. There was a 5 minute talk about the Avenger Initiative right at the end.

And even if SHIELD did have a heavy presence, which they didn't, it isn't that far out of the realms of possibility that a government secret agency would want a piece of Tony Stark. If it had happened in real life you can bet your life savings that the FBI, CIA or whatever other government agency would be heavily involved in the goings on.

I never understood the critisms of Iron Man 2, I thought it was great, sure it was pretty much a typical sequel, bigger and louder than the first, but playing it safe with the plot. However, it did it's job well and at the same time planted more seeds for the Avengers, however, watch Thor it plants just as many seeds. I'd say the Avengers idea is just as present in Thor as it was in Iron Man 2. Heck, the Avengers was just as present in the first Iron Man and Incredible Hulk as well, just a little bit more subtle.

 

[Chewy]

And just my opinion, but I don't think they made Loki "bad" enough. You can't have Loki that sympathetic a character imo.

Don't worry, he'll be *****ing it up in Avengers this time next year!

 

[piccolo]

I didn't have ill will toward him or feel like Loki was a bad guy at all, at any point in the movie, no matter what he did.

There is sympathetic. Then there is too sympathetic. He fell in the latter.

Not to say I disliked the character, I thought Loki was the best performance of the film and seized any scene was in. Hiddleston was incredible. I just never felt any kind of villainy from him, and thats what I wanted.

 

[The Morningstar]

I didn't have ill will toward him or feel like Loki was a bad guy at all, at any point in the movie, no matter what he did.

There is sympathetic. Then there is too sympathetic. He fell in the latter.

Not to say I disliked the character, I thought Loki was the best performance of the film and seized any scene was in. Hiddleston was incredible. I just never felt any kind of villainy from him, and thats what I wanted.

I can sorta understand that. I still thought he was a lying, manipulative bastard though.

I'm sure in Avengers we'll see Loki being more of a bastard. Getting his revenge, if you will.

 

[nightwing06]

Aside from some very weak live action versions of The Mighty Thor ( The Incredible Hulk Returns) until now i have mainly watched his adventures through animation and the comics.
So Director Kenneth Branagh deserves a ton of praise for bringing the larger than life Asgardian to the big screen.
Odin's son Thor (Chris Hemsworth) about to take the throne of Asgard but is interrupted when the Frost Giants attempt to retrieve the Casket of great power ceased by Odin (Anthony Hopkins) years before.Ignoring his father who wants to maintain the fragile peace treaty with the frost giants Thor travels to Jotunheim with Loki (Tom Hiddleston), childhood friend Sif (Jaimie Alexander) and the Warriors Three; Volstagg (Ray Stevenson), Fandral (Joshua Dallas) and Hogun (Tadanobu Asano) to make them pay for their disrespectful invasion.After a great battle,they are whisked back to Asgard by Odin,Thor is banished to earth for his disobedience and arrogance.He falls smack into
scientist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), her assistant Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings) and mentor Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard)

Director Kenneth Branagh truly brings Asgard to life on a grand scale most of the visuals are crystal clear,though some of the 3D is a bit choppy.
Chris Hemsworth is great as Thor he truly captures the spirit of Thor.
Tom Hiddleston is ok as his brother Loki though a bit to teary eyed for me,he excels in the scenes in which he puts his mischief to work.
The romance between Thor and Jane Foster is a bit lukewarm in the film,i dont really fault the actors but rather the pacing of the script,they definitely should have had more relationship building scenes together.I would have liked to have seen more of the Asgardians.There are a few inconstancies in the script.
I really liked Idris Elba as Heimdall he does the best he can with his short scenes in the film.
The action sequences are great just to see Thor's mighty hammer fly in the air,bowl over villains and return to him like a boomerang made me feel like a kid again.
There are cool references to other Marvel characters and i truly cant wait to see Thor mix it up with the other Avengers next year.
Scale of 1-10 a 7½

 

[piccolo]

Loki was the kind of guy i'd let into my birthday party, is all i'm saying.

I'd tell all my friends he can be a little sketchy and put the family pictures away, but I prob wouldn't even hide the booze. I need a Loki who will royally **** up my party.

Really the only complaint though. I didn't think the Thor/Jane thing was forced at all, he didn't even really fall for her, she was just a fair maiden he took a shining to. And she was pretty much just in lust. Nothing unbelievable about it at all.

Destroyer fight was weird not because it was short, which I don't think it was, but the ray it fired should have done some more damage to the Warriors 3 and Sif.

Dennings little quips didn't piss me off as much as i thought they would, and the fish out of water thing worked a little better than I thought it would with Thor. Who Hemsworth nailed.

Can't wait to see the directors cut, I could have stayed in there another hour. Waaaaay more enjoyable than Iron Man 2, though not as good as Iron Man 1.

 

[Mr. Earle]

The guy i'd definitely let into my party would be Thor. He's a real bro. Thor-bro!

 

[Quasimod0]

Call me whatever you like, but i enjoyed iron man 2 better than the first simply because of that drone fight, and justin hammer. lol. The drone fight was something id wanted to see in an iron man movie, iron man just going crazy and takin stuff out

 

[MadVillainy]

I think the only problem with Loki, which wasnt in the character himself because he was great, was part of his plot. I think his scheme wouldve been better if it involved humans more.
I didnt really care that much that Loki was killing the Frost Giants

 

[El Payaso]

And just my opinion, but I don't think they made Loki "bad" enough. You can't have Loki that sympathetic a character imo.

Why not?

Btw oh I thought he was pretty bad. Being bad and sympathetic are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Quasimod0]

edit

 

[Quasimod0]

I think the only problem with Loki, which wasnt in the character himself because he was great, was part of his plot. I think his scheme wouldve been better if it involved humans more.
I didnt really care that much that Loki was killing the Frost Giants

Maybe because we didnt sympathize with the frost giants

 

[OB12]

That is what I think was great about Hiddleston's performance, he lulls you into a false sense of security. Even though I knew that he was the antagonist, his lies were convincing me that he cared for his brother that he had his interests at heart. He was sly, cunning, and manipulative with a rage just under the surface. He doesn't come off as an evil villian because he is posing as something else most of the time and really I don't know that I want Loki to be straight evil, like a sociopath. His schemes have purpose and intent and he carries them out in a way that far more cerebral.

 

[MadVillainy]

Maybe because we didnt sympathize with the frost giants

yep

 

[piccolo]

Why not?

Btw oh I thought he was pretty bad. Being bad and sympathetic are not mutually exclusive.

I didn't mind Loki becoming king of Asgard. To me that intimates that the script did not do a proper job of villainizing the antagonist. I need to be upset when the "villain" wins.

Thats just me though.

 

[Quasimod0]

Even thor, whom loki tried to kill, felt sorry for his brother

 

[piccolo]

That is what I think was great about Hiddleston's performance, he lulls you into a false sense of security. Even though I knew that he was the antagonist, his lies were convincing me that he cared for his brother that he had his interests at heart. He was sly, cunning, and manipulative with a rage just under the surface. He doesn't come off as an evil villian because he is posing as something else most of the time and really I don't know that I want Loki to be straight evil, like a sociopath. His schemes have purpose and intent and he carries them out in a way that far more cerebral.

I thought he both cared for his brother and asgard, a good deal. And ultimately everything he did he seemed to do with Asgards interests in mind, regardless of the tactics he took to get there.

Killing Laufey, the scene with Odin and Thor where he dropped off of Bifrost, etc. all of these things painted him as a child who wanted acceptance, love, and all of that in addition to the sanctity of Asgard. It made for a great character. Not a great "villain".

 

[WildcatNC]

I didn't mind Loki becoming king of Asgard. To me that intimates that the script did not do a proper job of villainizing the antagonist. I need to be upset when the "villain" wins.

Thats just me though.

He wasn't meant to be a super villain in this film. He was supposed to become one by the end of it. He and Thor started out as naive "boys" in a way and were well down their destined path of men by the end.

This was as much Loki's origin story as it was Thor's. You were supposed to see a complex villain and understand where he comes from and the journey to where he goes.

 

[piccolo]

He wasn't a super villain by the end either. He's in a self-imposed exile after trying to destroy Jotunheim in Asgard's interest. He'll turn to villainy because he believes its his only path left. Inside, he's still the same person we saw throughout the movie - an inherently good person who honestly just needs a hug.

I got more than what I wanted from Loki performance-wise. Didn't get exactly what I wanted character-wise. I'll leave it at that, and agree that regardless of this Loki was the scene-stealer and Hiddleston deserves an academy nomination at the least.

 

[The Morningstar]

Loki getting on the throne wasn't him winning anyway. He didn't really want to be on the throne, as he said. He just didn't want his brother to rule (and who can really blame him?) and he wanted to be thought of as an equal to Thor, but in a different way.

I also agree that Hiddleston deserves some mention when it comes to the Oscars. If there is any justice in the world, he will.

But, there is no justice in the world, so he won't.

 

[Nathan]

I'm glad we didn't get a villain who is bad just for the sake of being bad. I don't really care for comic Loki and his villainy. With Movie Loki, you can actually see where he's coming from. Why he does what he's doing. And I'm glad that after all the love Odin has given him, he didn't immediately despise him after he learned the truth.