The Avengers Will Avengers do better than Wolverine?

[R_Hythlodeus]

if you had a Superman movie like that, folk would be flipping out.

Yes, but it was a Thor movie. Not a Superman movie. Different characters, different prerequisites, different characterization, different story, different attention span of the fans.

Also, while not in costume and powerless, Thor was nevertheless in full "Thor mode" during the SHIELD facility scene, IMO

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Yes, but it was a Thor movie. Not a Superman movie. Different characters, different prerequisites, different characterization, different story, different attention span of the fans.

Thor has always been Marvel's equivalent of Superman, so I do think they are comparable on what they delivered on the screen, in terms of how much of the grand superpowered entity we got.
I mean, you must be aware of the amount of complaining that Superman Returns recieved in this vein, that it lacked superheroic action, when it actually has far more superpowered action than Thor.

Also, while not in costume and powerless, Thor was nevertheless in full "Thor mode" during the SHIELD facility scene, IMO

Aye, but I didn't mention that because it was pretty much like any other hand to hand combat scene we have seen in numerous action movies.
Of course we want good characterisation and story, but we also want to see the superhero in full flow onscreen utilising their powers for a decent amount of time.
If they'd given him a really satisfying Thor-out in the real world for the finale, against the Destroyer or whatever else they could have had him do, then I probably would not be amazed that folk were content with the amount of Thor in the film.

I just can't help thinking that these movies get a pass where other superhero character's films would not, if they were doing similar things, and part of that reason is because subconciously folk think of them as set-up episodes for the 'real' film, the Avengers, they know that is right around the corner so don't mind a poor showing of a full on Thor.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

Thor has always been Marvel's equivalent of Superman, so I do think they are comparable on what they delivered on the screen, in terms of how much of the grand superpowered entity we got.
I mean, you must be aware of the amount of complaining that Superman Returns recieved in this vein, that it lacked superheroic action, when it actually has far more superpowered action than Thor.

I don't think that Thor is Marvel's equivalent to Supes. At least to me he never was. If anything he is more like Marvel's equivalent of Cpt. Marvel but even that comparison is unfair to all compared characters.
You see, I don't think Superman and Thor are comparable at all, they are two different beasts, made for two different tastes, but IF we compare Thor to Superman Returns then it's not "the amount of Superman" that was wrong with SR. It was a bad movie all in all. There were minor faults in almost every department, that alone wouldn't have been tragic. But the cumultation of all these faults made SR a very unenjoyable movie.
I don't think that Thor lacked action, in fact it had 3 or 4 big action sequences. It may had less superpowered action that you may have preferred, true, but it made up for that with good to great acting, humor and drama and was a good movie.
You know, the amount of Superman in Citizen Kane was perfect for that movie. If it had more superpowered action, I don't think the movie would have been better. Look at those awful Matrix movies. Big amount of Superman here, but were they any good? no. (Most like the first one, Cthulhu knows why, but almost everyone doesn't like the sequels were the amount of Superman was even higher than in the first)


edit: We CAN argue, however, about the INTENSITY of the superpowered action scenes. This is where most criticism for Thor comes from. The fight(s) in the 3rd act were not long or intense enough and not enough power was displayed (according to the critics). In this case it's not the amount of Superman, it's the intensity of Superman.

On the official "amount of Superman" scale, Thor has a very solid position, I think.

 

[Gamma Burst]

I don't think that Thor is Marvel's equivalent to Supes. At least to me he never was. If anything he is more like Marvel's equivalent of Cpt. Marvel but even that comparison is unfair to all compared characters.
You see, I don't think Superman and Thor are comparable at all, they are two different beasts, made for two different tastes, but IF we compare Thor to Superman Returns then it's not "the amount of Superman" that was wrong with SR. It was a bad movie all in all. There were minor faults in almost every department, that alone wouldn't have been tragic. But the cumultation of all these faults made SR a very unenjoyable movie.
I don't think that Thor lacked action, in fact it had 3 or 4 big action sequences. It may had less superpowered action that you may have preferred, true, but it made up for that with good to great acting, humor and drama and was a good movie.
You know, the amount of Superman in Citizen Kane was perfect for that movie. If it had more superpowered action, I don't think the movie would have been better. Look at those awful Matrix movies. Big amount of Superman here, but were they any good? no. (Most like the first one, Cthulhu knows why, but almost everyone doesn't like the sequels were the amount of Superman was even higher than in the first)


On the official "amount of Superman" scale, Thor has a very solid position, I think.

You're not alone on this. they're completely different characters.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Agreed.

 

[T"Challa]

I don't see how you can compare Thor and Supes..they are veeeeery different

 

[Weadazoid]

Well Thor had a huge following overseas so that compounds a new international market that wasn't there for Iron Man..


If this film lives up to expectations it could be a 400 milliondollar domestic hit, if it underperfroms I say look for a range of around 300 million.


Just the idea of all these individual films and the audience their in checking out their faves should push it past 200 milion add the action spectackle of it all and you have another 50 mill tacked on....

It really can't fail unless it is abysmally reviewed and recieved but I doubt Marvel is putting togeather a Green Lantern here.

FF5 did steal some of THors Box office Bluster thats for sure, had that not come out I think THor would have had a much bigger opening weekend.

 

[Gamma Burst]

Well Thor had a huge following overseas so that compounds a new international market that wasn't there for Iron Man..


If this film lives up to expectations it could be a 400 milliondollar domestic hit, if it underperfroms I say look for a range of around 300 million.


Just the idea of all these individual films and the audience their in checking out their faves should push it past 200 milion add the action spectackle of it all and you have another 50 mill tacked on....

It really can't fail unless it is abysmally reviewed and recieved but I doubt Marvel is putting togeather a Green Lantern here.

FF5 did steal some of THors Box office Bluster thats for sure, had that not come out I think THor would have had a much bigger opening weekend.

Good points, yoou've made.
Yeah, I really can't see this movie failing, unless a 'tragedy' (like the one you described) happens.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

I hereby demand that "the amount of Superman" should be the ultimate official measurement for future CBMs.

 

[Gamma Burst]

I hereby demand that "the amount of Superman" should be the ultimate official measurement for future CBMs.

Why not the 'amount of spider-man'?

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

heh

 

[Quasimod0]

What superman action was there in superman returns? lol. There was far more in thor. Unless you're talking about supes picking stuff up, then i guess there was more of that than in thor. But thor was exciting and funny. Superman returns was neither

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

It is quite clear that Marvel and Dc consider Thor and Superman to be their closest equivalents powerwise, the strongest members of their teams, possesing flight, and both being aliens from other worlds.
Dance around my arguments all you want, but i made some good points, *and* I was *only* talking about the superpowered action, the fact that you then went on to compare both movies in other areas, tells me that you did not have much of a counter argument to my points, other than a weak argument that they are 'two different characters', eh, haha, no sh** they are two different characters, but being realised onscreen visually, with such levels of superstrength and having the power of flight, (not to mention lightning/hammertime being the equivalent of Supes other powers such as heat vision and super-breath)they would require the same amount of sfx care and budget to realise onscreen.

What superman action was there in superman returns? lol. There was far more in thor. Unless you're talking about supes picking stuff up, then i guess there was more of that than in thor. But thor was exciting and funny. Superman returns was neither

There was far more superpowered action in SR, I don't even think anyone else argued that, they took the strategy of changing the goalposts of the argument to encompass all aspects of the movies in comparison, which is not what i was talking about at all.
It has been a few years since i watch ed it all the way through, but from what i recall here are all the SR superpowered action scenes...

- Young Clark Kent running at superspeed and jumping through the fields, discovering his ability to fly in the process.

- Plane Rescue

- eavsdropping on Lois and Cyclops.

- Floating above the Earth, then stopping the armed robbery/montage of rescues from around the world.

- flying over the city with Lois

- rescue of Parker Posey when her car goes out of control.

- Earthquake in Metropolis

- landing on Lex's kryptonite land, taking the beating from the thugs and the stabbing.

- Lifting the krypton land mass into space.

- end flight after he gets out of hospital and visits his son.

in comparison to Thor's

- Frost Giant scene

- sheild powerless fight(if you want to count that as the equivalent of Supes taking that powerless beating and stabbing at the hands of Lex and co)

- fight with Destroyer

- end fight with Loki

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

I'm deeply sorry that we misunderstand each other as it seems. But a movie is far more than its action sequences and what works storywise for one character doesn't necessarily work for another (with a completely different plot and background). if this is a weak argument for you, so be it. Myself, I don't find your "good" points good neither.

 

[Hawkingbird]

Oh please God I hope so

 

[BigThor]

It has been a few years since i watch ed it all the way through, but from what i recall here are all the SR superpowered action scenes...

- Young Clark Kent running at superspeed and jumping through the fields, discovering his ability to fly in the process.

- Plane Rescue

- eavsdropping on Lois and Cyclops.

- Floating above the Earth, then stopping the armed robbery

- montage of rescues from around the world.

- rescue of Parker Posey when her car goes out of control.

- Earthquake in Metropolis

- landing on Lex's kryptonite land, taking the beating from the thugs and the stabbing.

- Lifting the krypton land mass into space.

- end flight after he gets out of hospital and visits his son.

in comparison to Thor's

- Frost Giant scene

- sheild powerless fight(if you want to count that as the equivalent of Supes taking that powerless beating and stabbing at the hands of Lex and co)

- fight with Destroyer

- end fight with Loki

Well if you're going to count Superman taking a beating on the krptonite island and him lifting the island in different scenes then you might want to add these scenes onto Thor's list.

- Destroying the Bifrost Bridge

- Flying to Odin's palace

- Flying to Heimdall's observatory

- Being blown through the wall of Odin's palace

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

I'm deeply sorry that we misunderstand each other as it seems. But a movie is far more than its action sequences and what works storywise for one character doesn't necessarily work for another (with a completely different plot and background). if this is a weak argument for you, so be it. Myself, I don't find your "good" points good neither.

I'm not even talking about what was the better movie, all I'm saying is that I don't see why a Thor fan wouldn't be a little pissed that we didn't get to see him in his full glory for much of the film. Well, I do, becuase they know the Avengers is coming out next year, so they will get more Thor, but taken on it's own terms, it was lacking in that department. I guess i thought that fans who have read the comics would be excited to see an epic sequence with Thor flying around Earth in the movie, just as he does *all* the time in the books, but I guess for some strange reason they weren't bothered about seeing such a potentially sublime moment on film.
and as I said, if they had his superpower moment on Earth against the Destroyer be much more satisfying, then I could understand folk being satisfied.

anyway...

 

[BigThor]

I'm not even talking about what was the better movie, all I'm saying is that I don't see why a Thor fan wouldn't be a little pissed that we didn't get to see him in his full glory for much of the film. Well, I do, becuase they know the Avengers is coming out next year, so they will get more Thor, but taken on it's own terms, if was lacking in that department.
and as I said, if they had his superpower moment on Earth against the Destroyer be much more satisfying, then I could understand folk being satisfied.

anyway...

He was in full Thor for like half of the film (first 35 mins & last 20 mins), that seems pretty reasonable to me.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Well if you're going to count Superman taking a beating on the krptonite island and him lifting the island in different scenes then you might want to add these scenes onto Thor's list.

- Destroying the Bifrost Bridge

- Flying to Odin's palace

- Flying to Heimdall's observatory

- Being blown through the wall of Odin's palace

Dude...what? there is a break in the action there, and they were two entirely different types of sequences, I listed them as two different scenes, just as I did the fight with the Destroyer and the final fight on Asgard, because even though there is no break in the action, they take place in different locales and feature a different type of Thor action, i thought i was totally fair in the way i broke down the action scenes.
What you have done there, is the equivalent of me breaking down the Metropolis Earthquake into...

-Superman flying out over the sea

- superman catching the Daily Planet Globe

- superman using his heat vision to destroy the falling glass

- superman using his super-breath underground to stop the gas main from exploding.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

I'm not even talking about what was the better movie, all I'm saying is that I don't see why a Thor fan wouldn't be a little pissed that we didn't get to see him in his full glory for much of the film. Well, I do, becuase they know the Avengers is coming out next year, so they will get more Thor, but taken on it's own terms, if was lacking in that department.
and as I said, if they had his superpower moment on Earth against the Destroyer be much more satisfying, then I could understand folk being satisfied.

anyway...

it wasn't me starting with the amount of Superman comparisons, so..

anyway, you brought that argument before and while I'm beginning to think that this discussion leads nowhere, I'll try to answer that question once again why I'm (a Thor fan) not pissed that we didn't get to see him that much.
.) He WAS seen in full glory for about the half of the movie
.) What we saw was enough (or almost enough as some feel, the Destroyer fight needed a little more intensity)
.) The plot didn't need more action scenes
.) The character itself didn't need more action scenes
.) The character was represented extremly well

Those things have nothing to do with TA

and to end this with a question:
What do you mean with no superpower moment on Earth against the Destroyer? The whole "I create a tornado fly up and return the Destroyers blast" schtick was too ordinary for your tastes? i mean, that was pretty impressive.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

it wasn't me starting with the amount of Superman comparisons, so..

anyway, you brought that argument before and while I'm beginning to think that this discussion leads nowhere, I'll try to answer that question once again why I'm (a Thor fan) not pissed that we didn't get to see him that much.
.) He WAS seen in full glory for about the half of the movie
.) What we saw was enough (or almost enough as some feel, the Destroyer fight needed a little more intensity)
.) The plot didn't need more action scenes
.) The character itself didn't need more action scenes
.) The character was represented extremly well

Those things have nothing to do with TA

and to end this with a question:
What do you mean with no superpower moment on Earth against the Destroyer? The whole "I create a tornado fly up and return the Destroyers blast" schtick was too ordinary for your tastes? i mean, that was pretty impressive.

Sure, it was good to see Thor do his tornado thing, of course it was, but it was very brief, that's what I meant, I'm quite sure I only said 'if it had been more satisfying I could understand fans being ok with it', I never said there were no superpowered moments on Earth, just , y'know, no bits with him flying around and people seeing this God flying around on earth, things like that.

It was, what i would call, a very low key film, that's fine, but I would have liked some more epic moments in the film, just as you get in the, similarly powered Superman movies.
We don't have any modern Captain Marvel movies, so that is obviously why I compared Superman to Thor, he being the closest comparison powerwise we have seen on film already.

 

[The Morningstar]

The Thor vs Destroyer fight was very underwhelming. It should have been a dragged out slobber knocker. Have Thor trading blows with it at first, displaying his strength. Maybe flying at it, hitting it and causing a concussive blast from the sheer force of the blow.

Then when his physical attacks seemed to not work, use the more unique powers in his arsenal, like creating the Tornado.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

but that was the point of the Destroyer fight being brief: To show how powerful Thor really is. And why should he hold back and risk to loose time if he knows that he has to go to Asgard as soon as possible to fight his brother?

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

but that was the point of the Destroyer fight being brief: To show how powerful Thor really is. And why should he hold back and risk to loose time if he knows that he has to go to Asgard as soon as possible to fight his brother?

I was actually thinking before that the Destroyer was probably chosen as a second enemy because Thor could put him away easily, so they could skimp on the budget.
Ideally, in an ambitious Thor movie, they should have teamed up someone like the Absorbing Man with Loki, as they did in the old Buscema comic, with Loki sending him against Thor before he gets to him, give Thor an enemy that can actually give him a bit of trouble, and that they could come up with an inventive way of him defeating.
Then, as the battle is longer, there is more tension as you know thor has to get back to Asgard asap.

See, they played it safe with these movies, and I get it, they are not as big names as Superman, Batman and Spider-man, hell even the X-Men were pretty well known to the GA due to the cartoon in the 90s, but y'know, sometimes it's worth the gamble throwing an extra 30, 40, 50mil at the budget to see the bigger returns, and I honestly think if they had made a Thor on the same scale as SR, with a good story, it would have been massive, same with Cap. Iron-Man1 did the best at the BO for that reason, it was more ambitious, that was before they scaled back on the ambition as they were nervous about the movies not making enough so's to make the Avengers budget a problem.

So, y'know, i know why it was not on the same scale as SR, it's just, well, you have to take that into consideration when you rate the film right? Scale and ambition can determine how creatively successful the film is too, so I'm just expressing surprise that most of the fans on here were so pleased with the movie.

 

[Quasimod0]

Ah i misunderstood. My bad. Action scenes make me thing of fighting scenes. There werent really any in SR