Thor 2 Dark World news, speculation and pictures possible Spoilers - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 22

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I kind of wish we could find out what was in the original shooting script for this film since it seems like A LOT of stuff was cut out of this film, especially when you look at the "BTS" features.

What I wouldn't give if an "extended" or even "Director's" cut of the film could be released for this film.

I think an EE or DC would benefit this movie greatly. Taylor asked the fans to demand one from Marvel so it does exist in some form. Lets hope we get it because the movie as is is so disappointing.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Exactly, the universe was ending and people are running around making jokes and Thor gets on a train, that scene in particular was awful stuff. The finale of Anchorman had more danger and stakes if felt like at times.

That's just your opinion. I loved the train scene. Not only was it hysterical, it showcased a limit to Thor's power set. How exactly is he getting back into the fray at this point? Thor is so powerful you need ways to challenge and frustrate him.

Who was making jokes? The humor was all situational.

As far as the stakes, we've all seen the end of the world/universe/whatever plot device so often that why not have fun with it? Did anyone think Thor was not going to win? At no point in the Dark Knight did I think Batman was not going to beat the Joker. Yes lives would be lost etc. but I just saw Superman kill thousands of people last summer so I'm happy if Thor saves the universe with aplomb.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

I kind of wish we could find out what was in the original shooting script for this film since it seems like A LOT of stuff was cut out of this film, especially when you look at the "BTS" features.

What I wouldn't give if an "extended" or even "Director's" cut of the film could be released for this film.

I think an EE or DC would benefit this movie greatly. Taylor asked the fans to demand one from Marvel so it does exist in some form. Lets hope we get it because the movie as is is so disappointing.

Well I agree with you guys 100% here on wanting a director's cut. Not because I was disappointed with the film but because I thought it could've been even better with added scenes. I don't know what their reasons were for such a short runtime but this was definitely not a case of "less is more".

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

@Krypton Inc., my condolences on your father. That's way too young. I lost my own father many years ago and I know the pain you're feeling. We should always be grateful for the people we have in our lives while they are still with us.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

That's just your opinion. I loved the train scene. Not only was it hysterical, it showcased a limit to Thor's power set. How exactly is he getting back into the fray at this point? Thor is so powerful you need ways to challenge and frustrate him.

Who was making jokes? The humor was all situational.

Darcy was making funny comments, they were just poorly placed, and really Darcy and her intern shouldnt have been so involved in the final battle IMO.

The train is awful to me, the final battle ruins any momentum it develops by throwing stupid jokey scenes into it.

As far as the stakes, we've all seen the end of the world/universe/whatever plot device so often that why not have fun with it? Did anyone think Thor was not going to win? At no point in the Dark Knight did I think Batman was not going to beat the Joker. Yes lives would be lost etc. but I just saw Superman kill thousands of people last summer so I'm happy if Thor saves the universe with aplomb.

We know the ending to these movies, does that mean they shouldnt be tension filled or the danger shouldnt be felt? Say what you want about MOS but I felt the threat and tension of the final battle. Not so here, it was like a battle in the middle of an episode of Cheers, and that shouldnt be happening in a CBM.

No one has said there cant or shouldnt be humour in these movies, but dont throw it in when its not warranted. Let the serious moments be serious.

I find the whole final battle boring because there is simple no tension and most of the jokey scenes arent funny, even more so on re-watch.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

We know the ending to these movies, does that mean they shouldnt be tension filled or the danger shouldnt be felt? Say what you want about MOS but I felt the threat and tension of the final battle. Not so here, it was like a battle in the middle of an episode of Cheers, and that shouldnt be happening in a CBM.

No one has said there cant or shouldnt be humour in these movies, but dont throw it in when its not warranted. Let the serious moments be serious.

I find the whole final battle boring because there is simple no tension and most of the jokey scenes arent funny, even more so on re-watch.

Well to each his own. It's funny because I felt the opposite about MOS. Two invulnerable beings punching the living tar out of each other for 20 minutes while making stuff blow up was beyond boring. And I usually love that kind of stuff. I'm not saying I never want things to be serious but I also like a bit of variety in the films I watch. The Dark Knight did serious successfully. Man of Steel did not IMO.

Also saying that a comic book movie should never have comedy in serious situations is a little absurd to me. How many comics have I read growing up where characters are cracking jokes during battles involving massive amounts of destruction?

 

[First Avenger]

Just finished seeing this on blu-ray,and I can't help but love this movie even with all the problems you guys are talking about.

 

[Mjölnir]

Well I agree with you guys 100% here on wanting a director's cut. Not because I was disappointed with the film but because I thought it could've been even better with added scenes. I don't know what their reasons were for such a short runtime but this was definitely not a case of "less is more".

I agree. I really liked the movie but it looks and sounds like there were more of the good things to be had. Unfortunately I don't think there's any chance of seeing a different cut since they haven't done that before and the movie is supposed to work in a larger story, so it kind of has to be consistent.

Well to each his own. It's funny because I felt the opposite about MOS. Two invulnerable beings punching the living tar out of each other for 20 minutes while making stuff blow up was beyond boring. And I usually love that kind of stuff. I'm not saying I never want things to be serious but I also like a bit of variety in the films I watch. The Dark Knight did serious successfully. Man of Steel did not IMO.

Also saying that a comic book movie should never have comedy in serious situations is a little absurd to me. How many comics have I read growing up where characters are cracking jokes during battles involving massive amounts of destruction?

I agree with this as well. Not only was it invulnerable beings fighting on and on without anything happening to them, they also avoided to break up the monotony with proper character elements, challenges or humor.

Superman is a very compassionate hero so it would have been so much better if Zod was the only one bent on death and destruction, and Superman instead did his best to try to save people and avoid destruction. He could have failed, because being compassionate is not being the most effective, but he'd be much more of a character for it and he would have a visible challenge instead of them both just being invulnerable and uncaring. Humor would have been too much to ask for since the entire movie takes itself very seriously (too seriously imo).

I could have done without some of Darcy's stuff but I'd sooner take that dynamic on top of the rest rather than none at all. I find the train scene brilliant. It fits with the plot and it's a great little wink to how everything works out just so right in most movies.

 

[Loki882]

I agree. I really liked the movie but it looks and sounds like there were more of the good things to be had. Unfortunately I don't think there's any chance of seeing a different cut since they haven't done that before and the movie is supposed to work in a larger story, so it kind of has to be consistent.



I agree with this as well. Not only was it invulnerable beings fighting on and on without anything happening to them, they also avoided to break up the monotony with proper character elements, challenges or humor.

Superman is a very compassionate hero so it would have been so much better if Zod was the only one bent on death and destruction, and Superman instead did his best to try to save people and avoid destruction. He could have failed, because being compassionate is not being the most effective, but he'd be much more of a character for it and he would have a visible challenge instead of them both just being invulnerable and uncaring. Humor would have been too much to ask for since the entire movie takes itself very seriously (too seriously imo).

I could have done without some of Darcy's stuff but I'd sooner take that dynamic on top of the rest rather than none at all. I find the train scene brilliant. It fits with the plot and it's a great little wink to how everything works out just so right in most movies.

Not, really. MOS actually made you see the full horror of what Zod was doing and what the stakes were. Not making constant jokes while the world is freaking ending. No stupid comic-relief character making lame attempts at comedy while an entire city is on the brink of annihilation Also, Superman DID try and save people, by stopping the genocidal super-powered alien warlord. 99% of the destruction was done BEFORE Superman even got there, and 99% of the remaining destruction was done by Zod. So yes, MOS handled it's climax much better. Oh and there were actual consequences to that battle, unlike in TDW.

 

[Loki882]

Well to each his own. It's funny because I felt the opposite about MOS. Two invulnerable beings punching the living tar out of each other for 20 minutes while making stuff blow up was beyond boring. And I usually love that kind of stuff. I'm not saying I never want things to be serious but I also like a bit of variety in the films I watch. The Dark Knight did serious successfully. Man of Steel did not IMO.

Also saying that a comic book movie should never have comedy in serious situations is a little absurd to me. How many comics have I read growing up where characters are cracking jokes during battles involving massive amounts of destruction?

Actually, the Superman/Zod fight was only seven minutes (I clocked it). Also, I don't know about you growing up, but I know my experience. How many comics did I read growing up that did that, very VERY few. And the one's that did were sporadic about it (a joke every once in awhile). Maybe you're just older than me or we read different stuff.

 

[BoredGuy]

Personally I'd say MoS and TDW were both supremely disappointing, just for very different reasons.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Not, really. MOS actually made you see the full horror of what Zod was doing and what the stakes were. Not making constant jokes while the world is freaking ending. No stupid comic-relief character making lame attempts at comedy while an entire city is on the brink of annihilation Also, Superman DID try and save people, by stopping the genocidal super-powered alien warlord. 99% of the destruction was done BEFORE Superman even got there, and 99% of the remaining destruction was done by Zod. So yes, MOS handled it's climax much better. Oh and there were actual consequences to that battle, unlike in TDW.

Well I don't want to turn this into a Man of Steel bashing thread but I pretty much disagree with everything you just said.

Actually, the Superman/Zod fight was only seven minutes (I clocked it). Also, I don't know about you growing up, but I know my experience. How many comics did I read growing up that did that, very VERY few. And the one's that did were sporadic about it (a joke every once in awhile). Maybe you're just older than me or we read different stuff.

That could be. I haven't actually timed it myself but it certainly felt like 20 minutes at least. I own the movie so at some point I'll reassess but I find the enjoyment of that film diminishes with repeat viewings. In my mind all Zack Snyder accomplished is give us the 4th best Superman film ever made. Snyder got the character of Superman so wrong that I'm not really looking forward to Batman vs. Superman that much.

Well I don't know how old you are. I'm 40 and was reading comics in the 80's but I've read comics dating all the way back into the early 60's during the Silver/Marvel age through the 70's. I've even read a lot of Golden Age stuff too. I got out of comics in the 90s and started reading again around 2011. Some comics are good. Some are crap. The newer stuff is hit or miss to me. Everybody's tastes are different that's for sure.

 

[Mjölnir]

Not, really. MOS actually made you see the full horror of what Zod was doing and what the stakes were. Not making constant jokes while the world is freaking ending. No stupid comic-relief character making lame attempts at comedy while an entire city is on the brink of annihilation Also, Superman DID try and save people, by stopping the genocidal super-powered alien warlord. 99% of the destruction was done BEFORE Superman even got there, and 99% of the remaining destruction was done by Zod. So yes, MOS handled it's climax much better. Oh and there were actual consequences to that battle, unlike in TDW.

This isn't the place to discuss MoS so I'll just say that I clearly disagree. Your comment about saving people shows that you didn't get my point at all and you are just wrong about Superman not deliberately causing damage.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well to each his own. It's funny because I felt the opposite about MOS. Two invulnerable beings punching the living tar out of each other for 20 minutes while making stuff blow up was beyond boring. And I usually love that kind of stuff. I'm not saying I never want things to be serious but I also like a bit of variety in the films I watch. The Dark Knight did serious successfully. Man of Steel did not IMO.

Yeah the fight wasnt 20 mins long, and it at least had consequences and its why the Superman killing Zod scene is so shocking and clever. Its clearly against what Superman believes in, but once Zod said he would never stop Superman knew then he wasnt going to beat him into submission and the only option was kill him, something that tore Superman apart inside, you can even see him wrestling with it before he actually kills Zod.

If even a fraction of those stakes was given to the final battle of TDW it would have been much better. The TDW battle is just boring though because there are no stakes.

Also saying that a comic book movie should never have comedy in serious situations is a little absurd to me. How many comics have I read growing up where characters are cracking jokes during battles involving massive amounts of destruction?

Then you are reading different comics than me. I have read a few Thor ones and didnt see any jokes during the big battles. And no other comic I have read I can recall doing it either.

Not, really. MOS actually made you see the full horror of what Zod was doing and what the stakes were. Not making constant jokes while the world is freaking ending. No stupid comic-relief character making lame attempts at comedy while an entire city is on the brink of annihilation Also, Superman DID try and save people, by stopping the genocidal super-powered alien warlord. 99% of the destruction was done BEFORE Superman even got there, and 99% of the remaining destruction was done by Zod. So yes, MOS handled it's climax much better. Oh and there were actual consequences to that battle, unlike in TDW.

See my post above, after realising Superman couldnt beat Zod into submission, he had to kill him. If TDW would have had the stakes and seriousness nature of the MOS it would have been much better IMO.

 

[Vartha]

Yeah the fight wasnt 20 mins long, and it at least had consequences and its why the Superman killing Zod scene is so shocking and clever. Its clearly against what Superman believes in, but once Zod said he would never stop Superman knew then he wasnt going to beat him into submission and the only option was kill him, something that tore Superman apart inside, you can even see him wrestling with it before he actually kills Zod.

If even a fraction of those stakes was given to the final battle of TDW it would have been much better. The TDW battle is just boring though because there are no stakes.



Then you are reading different comics than me. I have read a few Thor ones and didnt see any jokes during the big battles. And no other comic I have read I can recall doing it either.



See my post above, after realising Superman couldnt beat Zod into submission, he had to kill him. If TDW would have had the stakes and seriousness nature of the MOS it would have been much better IMO.

There ARE times Thor did joke ALITTLE once in awhile tho in the comics. He does with himself (when present, Future and Past Thor's meet) in God Of thunder. THAT wasn't too bad and in Blood Oath he jokes with the Warriors Three once in awhile.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Yeah the fight wasnt 20 mins long, and it at least had consequences and its why the Superman killing Zod scene is so shocking and clever. Its clearly against what Superman believes in, but once Zod said he would never stop Superman knew then he wasnt going to beat him into submission and the only option was kill him, something that tore Superman apart inside, you can even see him wrestling with it before he actually kills Zod.

If even a fraction of those stakes was given to the final battle of TDW it would have been much better. The TDW battle is just boring though because there are no stakes.

Then you are reading different comics than me. I have read a few Thor ones and didnt see any jokes during the big battles. And no other comic I have read I can recall doing it either.

See my post above, after realising Superman couldnt beat Zod into submission, he had to kill him. If TDW would have had the stakes and seriousness nature of the MOS it would have been much better IMO.

Man I could write an essay on why Man of Steel failed to do all the things you just stated but others (including Mark Waid writer of Superman Birthright) have already done so.

As far as Thor the comic - I don't know what you've read but I've read Thor starting with Journey Into Mystery 83 and throughout its history it has been loaded with humor and even just older comics in general. I'd have to dig through my collection to find examples but there's a lot of goofy but fun stuff. A lot of newer comics are filled with fake pathos and orangey palettes and nonsense and honestly comics have come a long way from being for all ages which is why the industry has suffered. But that's another discussion and I don't want to come across as an old codger. There is also a lot of awesome new stuff as well. (I really enjoy guys like Straczynski, Hickman and Brubaker etc. so I don't want you to think I'm stuck in the past.)

Listen fellas no one's putting a gun to your head saying you have to like this movie. But if you are going to trash it, don't expect everyone to agree with you. Thor is a character with limited appeal (it was never a hot seller like Spidey or X-Men or Batman) but Thor 2 is Marvel Studios' third highest grossing film behind Avengers and Iron Man 3 and other than Batman, Spider-Man, Iron Man and Superman is the only solo comic character to crack half a billion. It did this in November. Pretty impressive. What that means is there are a lot of people who liked the film and liked the characterization and liked the humor.

Personally I loved the film. It is my second favorite Marvel film from any studio and third favorite CBM. Reviews I know were somewhat middling and I'm under no illusions that everyone feels the same as I do. I'm fine with the criticisms though and I hope if Marvel's listening they will make Thor 3 blow this one out of the water.

What bothers me is people expecting to everything be like their definition of what they think a good film is. If you prefer the tone of films like Man of Steel knock yourself out. DC is making more movies. A friend of mine really liked Thor but complained about some of the humor at the end. He went and highly recommended Flashpoint Paradox. I watched that and thought it sucked. I saw Wonder Woman kill a child and was revolted. If that's the direction DC is going then I have no interest. But then again maybe I'm not their customer.

 

[Vartha]

Easy guys. And Try not to get too far off track...

 

[Hammer!]

Anybody listen to Fiege/Hiddleston's commentary track? Apparently the Prologue was added after first screenings, and Loki's intro was added a couple months before the opening. Makes me wonder how the heck this film originally started. Jane's lunch date? Vanaheim battle?

 

[Mjölnir]

Anybody listen to Fiege/Hiddleston's commentary track? Apparently the Prologue was added after first screenings, and Loki's intro was added a couple months before the opening. Makes me wonder how the heck this film originally started. Jane's lunch date? Vanaheim battle?

I haven't heard it as I only have the digital version but I'd assume there was something else in place to give a bit of information. It would be hard to understand the plot if you just remove the prologue and don't add any other info.

Other than that I think the Vanaheim battle was probably a very early scene, and likely the full one. I can imagine that they cut it down to not delay Thor's entrance too long into the movie when they added two other scenes before it.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Man I could write an essay on why Man of Steel failed to do all the things you just stated but others (including Mark Waid writer of Superman Birthright) have already done so.

Agree to disagree on this one, as a huge Superman fan (though overall I am more of a Marvel guy) MOS got a lot more right than wrong and I could write an essay on what it got right as well.

As far as Thor the comic - I don't know what you've read but I've read Thor starting with Journey Into Mystery 83 and throughout its history it has been loaded with humor and even just older comics in general. I'd have to dig through my collection to find examples but there's a lot of goofy but fun stuff. A lot of newer comics are filled with fake pathos and orangey palettes and nonsense and honestly comics have come a long way from being for all ages which is why the industry has suffered. But that's another discussion and I don't want to come across as an old codger. There is also a lot of awesome new stuff as well. (I really enjoy guys like Straczynski, Hickman and Brubaker etc. so I don't want you to think I'm stuck in the past.)

Listen fellas no one's putting a gun to your head saying you have to like this movie. But if you are going to trash it, don't expect everyone to agree with you. Thor is a character with limited appeal (it was never a hot seller like Spidey or X-Men or Batman) but Thor 2 is Marvel Studios' third highest grossing film behind Avengers and Iron Man 3 and other than Batman, Spider-Man, Iron Man and Superman is the only solo comic character to crack half a billion. It did this in November. Pretty impressive. What that means is there are a lot of people who liked the film and liked the characterization and liked the humor.

Yeah the Avengers had nothing to with it did it? Come on man both Iron Man 3 AND Thor 2 got a HUGE boost from the goodwill that The Avengers drummed up, THATS why it made the money it did in November. Without TA it wouldnt have made as much money and that is just plain truth. A lot of people were disappointed in the movie as well and thats why we are complaining, so hopefully Marvel listen and address those complaints.

I wouldnt say Thor is a character with limited appeal anymore either, not after the 1st movie (which I loved) or TA.

Personally I loved the film. It is my second favorite Marvel film from any studio and third favorite CBM. Reviews I know were somewhat middling and I'm under no illusions that everyone feels the same as I do. I'm fine with the criticisms though and I hope if Marvel's listening they will make Thor 3 blow this one out of the water.

Cool, I am honestly glad you like it, wish I felt the same.

What bothers me is people expecting to everything be like their definition of what they think a good film is. If you prefer the tone of films like Man of Steel knock yourself out. DC is making more movies. A friend of mine really liked Thor but complained about some of the humor at the end. He went and highly recommended Flashpoint Paradox. I watched that and thought it sucked. I saw Wonder Woman kill a child and was revolted. If that's the direction DC is going then I have no interest. But then again maybe I'm not their customer.

I had no definition what so ever about what I wanted Thor 2 to be, I didnt know enough about the characters to have a set movie in my. I just wanted a good movie with emotion and heart to it and I got non of these things.

I liked MOS, but that doesnt mean I want all CBM's to be like it, MOS needed more humour while Thor 2 needed a lot less. I actually think The Wolverine got the balance the most right in regards to humour in CBM's in 2013 despite MOS being my favourite. The 1st Thor got the balance much better as well. It got suitably serious when it needed to be and was very emotional at times. You didnt see any jokes made in the final battle of Thor 1 which is probably my favourite stand alone movie in the MCU.

As I have said nothing in Thor 2 had any tension, or consequence, because a joke would be made during the scene or 30 seconds after it, its just too much and ruins the movie for me. Taylor didnt want this much humour in the movie, I just wish they had let him do his thing.

I like and have read both Marvel and DC, I also like and read characters like Judge Dredd, Hellboy, Transformers, G.I Joe as well as some others. I want EVERY comic book movie to be good as it only helps the genre, but Thor to me was just Marvel's ego going crazy. Thor 2 could have and should have been as big and as good as The Avengers but Marvel seemed to micro manage the movie from the start and it came out very disappointing IMO.

They seem to be putting a lot more effort into Cap 2 which I hope lives upto the hype.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

There ARE times Thor did joke ALITTLE once in awhile tho in the comics. He does with himself (when present, Future and Past Thor's meet) in God Of thunder. THAT wasn't too bad and in Blood Oath he jokes with the Warriors Three once in awhile.

Joking with the WT is expected as they are his friends, but I bet they never joked when the universe was on the verge of ending?

I also thought his banter with Loki was great when he sets him free. Humour like that in the movie seemed natural and came across much better than the stuff in the final battle which just shouldnt have been there.

 

[Mjölnir]

As I have said nothing in Thor 2 had any tension, or consequence, because a joke would be made during the scene or 30 seconds after it, its just too much and ruins the movie for me. Taylor didnt want this much humour in the movie, I just wish they had let him do his thing..

I've seen this detailed time reference several times now and yet there's no joke that close to Frigga's or Loki's death, for example.

As for Taylor, he said that his favorite thing in the MCU is that you can mix in those kinds of things, giving the example of Thor finally returning and then having Jane act like an angry girlfriend. I haven't heard him talk negatively about that aspect so it seems shaky to say that he was against it.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I've seen this detailed time reference several times now and yet there's no joke that close to Frigga's or Loki's death, for example.

There wasnt for Frigga's I will admit, though the scene still lacked emotion for me. With Loki he screams at him dying, then they make to the cave and talk for a moment until Jane's phone goes off and it turns into a comedic moment, that was really poorly placed humour IMO. Loki had 'died' literally minutes ago.

I think Selvig's joke later to Thor would have been the right time for a comedy element to follow.

As for Taylor, he said that his favorite thing in the MCU is that you can mix in those kinds of things, giving the example of Thor finally returning and then having Jane act like an angry girlfriend. I haven't heard him talk negatively about that aspect so it seems shaky to say that he was against it.

Again, I actually thought that humour worked. It was mostly the stuff in the 2nd half of the movie which ruins things for me (though not the Thor and Loki stuff). And with Taylor, he stated that Marvel demanded more humour be added to the movie, and he just said he went along with it.

 

[Vartha]

Anybody listen to Fiege/Hiddleston's commentary track? Apparently the Prologue was added after first screenings, and Loki's intro was added a couple months before the opening. Makes me wonder how the heck this film originally started. Jane's lunch date? Vanaheim battle?

I'd have to look in the Young Readers novel, I barely remember if it was the same at the beginning or not, but the novels normally have stuff left out.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Agree to disagree on this one, as a huge Superman fan (though overall I am more of a Marvel guy) MOS got a lot more right than wrong and I could write an essay on what it got right as well.

Fair enough. I've said my piece on Man of Steel on other forums so I don't feel a need to go into detail and I don't like harping on films that other people seem to like. Honestly even though the final battle seemed very dragged out, I actually really liked the film when I first saw it and bought it as soon as it came out on Blu-Ray. However, I liked it less and less with repeat viewings and after having time to ruminate on it realized a lot of the criticisms against it were spot on. Whereas with The Dark World the more I think about it and watch it the more I like it. We're similar in that I'm mostly a Marvel guy but love Superman. This is just one area we diverge.

Yeah the Avengers had nothing to with it did it? Come on man both Iron Man 3 AND Thor 2 got a HUGE boost from the goodwill that The Avengers drummed up, THATS why it made the money it did in November. Without TA it wouldnt have made as much money and that is just plain truth. A lot of people were disappointed in the movie as well and thats why we are complaining, so hopefully Marvel listen and address those complaints.

I wouldnt say Thor is a character with limited appeal anymore either, not after the 1st movie (which I loved) or TA.

You may very well be right. That's something we'll never know for sure. Both Iron Man 3 and Thor received similar percentage bumps (of course Iron Man 3 came immediately after and had the benefit of the 3D bump as well). But if either of the films were turkeys they would not have done as well as they did and not have gotten repeat viewings in the theater. Plus if everyone who saw Avengers saw Thor 2 it would have done even better at the box office. Based on the gross differential between the two post Avengers films, I think the people who saw the films were the ones who were interested in each respective character's story arc.

Cool, I am honestly glad you like it, wish I felt the same.

I had no definition what so ever about what I wanted Thor 2 to be, I didnt know enough about the characters to have a set movie in my. I just wanted a good movie with emotion and heart to it and I got non of these things.

I liked MOS, but that doesnt mean I want all CBM's to be like it, MOS needed more humour while Thor 2 needed a lot less. I actually think The Wolverine got the balance the most right in regards to humour in CBM's in 2013 despite MOS being my favourite. The 1st Thor got the balance much better as well. It got suitably serious when it needed to be and was very emotional at times. You didnt see any jokes made in the final battle of Thor 1 which is probably my favourite stand alone movie in the MCU.

As I have said nothing in Thor 2 had any tension, or consequence, because a joke would be made during the scene or 30 seconds after it, its just too much and ruins the movie for me. Taylor didnt want this much humour in the movie, I just wish they had let him do his thing.

I like and have read both Marvel and DC, I also like and read characters like Judge Dredd, Hellboy, Transformers, G.I Joe as well as some others. I want EVERY comic book movie to be good as it only helps the genre, but Thor to me was just Marvel's ego going crazy. Thor 2 could have and should have been as big and as good as The Avengers but Marvel seemed to micro manage the movie from the start and it came out very disappointing IMO.

They seem to be putting a lot more effort into Cap 2 which I hope lives upto the hype.

I'm actually of the opinion that if Man of Steel did not turn out to be the type of film it was and did not get the reception it did that Thor 2 would've been different. The characters are very similar in a lot of ways and I believe that Marvel wanted to distance itself from the negative backlash of Man of Steel by having a climax that was not dreary and depressing but actually fun. I could be totally wrong about this but that was my first impression.

In the end I don't think there is any more humor in TDW than in the Avengers. Darcy and Ian kissing in the middle of the battle was no less silly than a SHIELD agent playing Galaga - in my opinion anyway.

I agree with you that Marvel can't stick with that tone all the time though and hope they mix it up. I think they have to mix it up. Some characters naturally lend themselves to more serious material than others. Of course it also has to do with how a character is written. We've seen Batman campy and we've seen Batman dark as hell. I have high hopes for The Winter Soldier as well. Positive buzz for this one is more universal than the last two Marvel Studios films so we'll see.

Marvel isn't perfect but they are maintaining a very high level of quality especially relative to their quantity of output. They are making mistakes along the way but nothing egregious and they are learning from their mistakes. I look at TDW as an exciting chapter in a larger story and am totally game for the character to be pulled in different directions as they try new things. I am really enjoying the characterizations and world building and I'm always wondering what's next. You can't please everyone but I hope Thor 3 is a film that delivers elements that other people would really like to see. I actually think it's high time that Thor really cut lose in a battle. I'm of the opinion that Surtur appearing might be jumping the gun but if he is part of the next installment, Thor's going to need to give it everything he's got.

BTW, Thor 2 was actually a troubled production from the beginning with the whole Patty Jenkins and Natalie Portman fiasco, Josh Dallas unable to reprise his role as Fandral, and Jamie Alexander getting seriously injured on set, the butting heads between Taylor and Marvel over the soundtrack and rumors about the director split and disagreements over runtime, etc. With all of that, I'm amazed that we got as good of a film as we did.

This was also Taylor's first box office film so naturally Marvel would want to try and reign him in a little. I would like to see what Taylor could do with more latitude but I'm beginning to think he might not be back for the third installment. Also as much as I liked his grounded approach, I want to see a little more fantasy and less sci fi. I liked the way Branagh presented the Jotuns. If fire demons from Muspelheim show up with laser guns I'll be pissed.

Easy guys. And Try not to get too far off track...

Hey yeah - Sorry if I came across as being incendiary. I'm certainly not trying to be - just expressing my views. I thought we were having a polite discussion but will be mindful of my words. We're all just fans who want to see great movies. It's all cool.