Which is better? Thor vs Thor: The Dark World vs Thor: Ragnarok

[Finarfiniel]

So, which entry of the Thor trilogy is your favourite and why?

 

[Finarfiniel]

I voted for Ragnarok. At times it felt like classic Lee/Kirby or even Simonson era Thor made real on the screen, it produces a wonderful sense of joy and nostalgia for me every time I watch it. Also, it got rid of the dull, irritating human characters that sucked up so much screen time and focus in the previous two entries and finally dared to take Thor fully cosmic which is what I've always wanted for the franchise. There's not a character in Ragnarok that I don't like or find a joy to watch. And last (but certainly not least), we finally got a Thor movie that made Thor the most important character. It took a while coming, but we finally got there all thanks to Waititi. t: So, as much as I enjoy Branagh's Thor (and think it's pretty underrated), I still have to give the prize to Ragnarok.

My ranking would be:

1. Ragnarok
2. Thor
3. The Dark World

 

[RoastBeast]

I'm with you on all those points-especially Ragnarok being Thor-centric and it was about time. I liked Thor I, but it felt a bit as if there was unsurety about how to approach him... oh, he's a god, but fish out of water- there's his vulnerability! It was kind of pedestrian in that, though I loved the Shakespearean undertone of it. Dark World, it was kind of a mess, though one I didn't mind paying to see in a theater- once. But looking deep at some of the ways Thor and Odin were behaving, I think there was some damage done if you look too close. And taking out Frigga just to motivate others, there was pedestrian again. I think it would have played better if Frigga had been all up in Odin's grill about how he was handling the attacks and staged her own little rebellion, turning her sons loose on the problem. But, hey, maybe I just miss Frigga. (and DW was too much Loki's movie, when it came down to it)

 

[Yowza]

The first Thor (haven't seen Dark World in it's entirety and not as bad as expecting but doubt better than first one).

Honestly, after just having seen the 3rd film I think there was greatness to be extracted from Thor: Ragnarok but overall wasn't that good.

Editing as well as storyflow was subpar. Humor meshed with drama I think was needed moreso at times as well. It still was actually funny unlike a lot of forced humor in put into movies meant to be crowdpleasers though. Sound and music was top notch as were the actors with what they were given. Still felt like a lot of odd random scenes meshed together meant to be a story though with too much unneeded repetition of key words or phrases (home is not a place it's a people didn't need to keep being repeated for instance nor being continuously hit over the head with the "Sun is Going Down" mockery as funny the first time). Also, a lot of stuff happening that didn't make sense (why Odin passes right when go see him, Thor's visions of Odin, how Hulk got on Sakaar, why Hela instantly appears right at Odin's death and how transports to earth out of dark cloud, ect.). Even the most dramatically revealing scene in which Hela dropped the ceiling showing the real history of Asgard was pretty heavy handed exposition as was them seeming like little kids talking about their father as battling for Asgard. This interwoven with absolutely topnotch beautifully rendered CGI bit baffling as was seemingly odd transition scenes (like re-shot one with Hela posing then see her with different makeup on when catches Thor's hammer).

It also felt in a way like a movie that was trying to shake off it's predecessors to become something else but just didn't feel complete. Thought the Credit's sequence with all the visual illustrations really put the film in a positive light though as did the music.

 

[HammerDown]

Thor Ragnarok without a shadow of a doubt.

 

[Iceman]

Ragnarok of course. Thor 1 is also good and could have been really good with some parts excised. The Asgard sections I really like.

 

[Yowza]

I think Ragnarok would be helped with an extended cut to some extent. It had too much baggage to really be what it wanted to be though. Cast and crew had good time making this time great. It had too much it had to fit in (knowing of course the grand finale actually Infinity War) so just went the heck with it becoming a sort of Troma movie at times it seems to me.

Edit: More I think of it, seems like Marvel wanted to do a Planet Hulk movie but didn't come together... Had a serious Ragnarok movie but didn't think would work... Just combined various movie ideas together to get over with before moving onto Infinity War. Better to have just cut to Sakaar for Planet Hulk film rest of the way (in other words they'd stay in Sakaar) and have ending cliffhanger instead being Thanos ship moving into Asgard to meet-up with Hela to set-up Infinity War. Would've made sense as had some of the gems he was after and movie wouldn't have felt so forced.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Ragnarok is the winner here for me but it's not a landslide. Personally I love *all* of the Thor films (LOVE not like). None of them are perfect but Ragnarok gets the closest probably purely because they finally went balls-to-the-wall with Thor which I wish they did from the get-go but alas they didn't have the budget when they filmed Thor 1. They also needed a powerful creative vision like Taika's to push this kind of zaniness through.

However I will never understand why the first two were savaged by fans (although the second gets more vitriol than the first). All of them have redeeming qualities to me that make them immensely enjoyable. Thor as a concept is a hard sell for the average movie goer and a difficult character to adapt to the screen but Marvel made it work. I know it's not a popular opinion but the Thor films firmly remain my favorite franchise in the MCU.

 

[psylockolussus]

Thor 3
Thor 1
Thor 2

 

[Webfoot Hero]

While I have a soft spot for Thor 1, Thor 3 takes it for best Thor film.

 

[Saturius]

Thor 1 by far. It had the best depiction of ALL the main characters and executed its story the best out of all three. It fell short a bit on the quickness of Thor learning humility, but beyond that everything else was perfect.

Thor 2 was just bland with a poor, paper thin villain, a wasted Jane Foster and basically just not living up to the potential and good will left form Thor 1

Thor 3 was a lot of fun. But that is not necessarily a good thing. The jarring tone between the Asgard scenes and Sakaar was not not a good fit for the film. You couldn't take anything seriously and the meshing of two different stories didn't work either. As such, Ragnarok and Planet Hulk were not giving their proper due. Each felt like a cliff notes version of the real stories. They should not have been combined.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Yeah Thor 1 really doesn't get enough credit. I personally find it the most moving of all the Thor films. And I've lost count of how many times I've watched the scene where Thor gets his hammer back LOL. Gives me chills every time.

But Ragnarok is just off the hook. There's just way too much to like about that film even despite my own personal misgivings.

1. Ragnarok

Pros: Best Thor character arc. Best action in the MCU. Kirby! Hela. Surtur. Sakaar. Grandmaster. Hulk/Thor. Valkyrie. Korg. Fenris. Skurge's last stand. This film's got it all.

Cons: Thor's personality shift is a little jarring. Haircut. RIP Mjolnir & Warriors Three. No Sif.

2. Thor

Most heart. Branagh casts Hemsworth and Hiddleston. Jotunheim battle. Thor's banishment. Warriors Three. Destroyer. Stellar soundtrack. Best balance of humor.

Cons: Lower budget. Not enough powered up Thor.

3. Dark World

Best soundtrack. Best costumes. Thor is Thor for the entire film. Bor. Asgard. Kurse. The invasion. Black hole grenades. Frigga's funeral. The escape. Thor/Loki. Mjolnir and the portals.

Cons: Thor and Malekith overshadowed by Loki, Odin/Malekith back story needed more flushing out, needed less Earth and more Sif and the Warriors Three. Action scenes needed more displays of Thor's power.

 

[First Avenger]

Yeah Thor 1 really doesn't get enough credit. I personally find it the most moving of all the Thor films. And I've lost count of how many times I've watched the scene where Thor gets his hammer back LOL. Gives me chills every time.

But Ragnarok is just off the hook. There's just way too much to like about that film even despite my own personal misgivings.

1. Ragnarok

Pros: Best Thor character arc. Best action in the MCU. Kirby! Hela. Surtur. Sakaar. Grandmaster. Hulk/Thor. Valkyrie. Korg. Fenris. Skurge's last stand. This film's got it all.

Cons: Thor's personality shift is a little jarring. Haircut. RIP Mjolnir & Warriors Three. No Sif.

2. Thor

Most heart. Branagh casts Hemsworth and Hiddleston. Jotunheim battle. Thor's banishment. Warriors Three. Destroyer. Stellar soundtrack. Best balance of humor.

Cons: Lower budget. Not enough powered up Thor.

3. Dark World

Best soundtrack. Best costumes. Thor is Thor for the entire film. Bor. Asgard. Kurse. The invasion. Black hole grenades. Frigga's funeral. The escape. Thor/Loki. Mjolnir and the portals.

Cons: Thor and Malekith overshadowed by Loki, Odin/Malekith back story needed more flushing out, needed less Earth and more Sif and the Warriors Three. Action scenes needed more displays of Thor's power.

I agree almost 100% with you. Thor's change in Ragnarok makes more sense if you take into account the Avengers movies. It's part of his evolution as a character through the movies, a mix of everything we saw from Thor to Ultron. I also feel like he is plenty serious in many scenes upon rewatch.

Thor was a great introduction with a maybe too low of a budget.

TDW had a lot of good and cool stuff shortchanged by the cons you listed.

 

[Yowza]

Thor 1 by far. It had the best depiction of ALL the main characters and executed its story the best out of all three. It fell short a bit on the quickness of Thor learning humility, but beyond that everything else was perfect.

Thor 2 was just bland with a poor, paper thin villain, a wasted Jane Foster and basically just not living up to the potential and good will left form Thor 1

Thor 3 was a lot of fun. But that is not necessarily a good thing. The jarring tone between the Asgard scenes and Sakaar was not not a good fit for the film. You couldn't take anything seriously and the meshing of two different stories didn't work either. As such, Ragnarok and Planet Hulk were not giving their proper due. Each felt like a cliff notes version of the real stories. They should not have been combined.

Thoughts on Thor 3 mostly in line with mine. I'm frankly surprised more don't feel this same way. I think Marvel Studio's has gained enough popularity to become critique proof to some extent.

For the first Thor movie I thought the whole learning humility a bit odd for a being potentially 1000's of years old. I mean one would think he'd be grown up by that point... (Unless of course time has moved differently on Asgard and he's only really experienced 20 years worth of Earth time while in Asgard but I don't remember that being an explanation).

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

I agree almost 100% with you. Thor's change in Ragnarok makes more sense if you take into account the Avengers movies. It's part of his evolution as a character through the movies, a mix of everything we saw from Thor to Ultron. I also feel like he is plenty serious in many scenes upon rewatch.

Thor was a great introduction with a maybe too low of a budget.

TDW had a lot of good and cool stuff shortchanged by the cons you listed.

I hear you about Thor's transition. Moments like Thor in the Quinjet trying to figure out Stark's passcode helped sell it for me by reminding us that Thor is "one of the guys" and the same dude who had shawarma after fending off an alien attack back in the first Avengers. And we do see him lightening up a bit in Age of Ultron. The scene at Stark Tower is one of my favorites.

It took me awhile to get on board but now I'm mostly OK with Thor's progression - interested to see what the Russo's do with him. He still needs to be serious when the occasion calls for it.

Part of me actually wishes his rooming with Darryl could have been part of canon because it would help explain his antics a little further. But obviously it can't be since Banner was not on Earth. Still it would've been funny if Thor crashed with Darryl while breaking up with Jane and having to make pitstops on Earth while chasing the Infinity Stones.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Thoughts on Thor 3 mostly in line with mine. I'm frankly surprised more don't feel this same way. I think Marvel Studio's has gained enough popularity to become critique proof to some extent.

For the first Thor movie I thought the whole learning humility a bit odd for a being potentially 1000's of years old. I mean one would think he'd be grown up by that point... (Unless of course time has moved differently on Asgard and he's only really experienced 20 years worth of Earth time while in Asgard but I don't remember that being an explanation).

I respect the critiques of Thor 3. I don't think Marvel is critique proof. I think they've just been on a hot streak.

And overall Ragnarok was just a genuinely good film that hit enough of the right notes and for a lot of people was a breath of fresh air. It gets far more right than it gets wrong. And as a long time reader of Thor (all the way back to the 60's) I personally love the odd juxtapositions of these films and think Ragnarok did it the best.

Thor is pretty whack. I think he's probably the toughest character to adapt to the big screen.

 

[BigThor]

1. Thor: Ragnarok

2. Thor

3. Thor: The Dark World

If Thor 1 had a larger budget and TDW's costume design and cinematography it would give Ragnarok a run for it's money.