Thor Ragnarok*

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Thievius, Apr 10, 2017.

  1. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    FWIW, I certainly don't claim that the first two Thor movies were 100% serious - they just balanced the tone better.

    From my review of "Thor":

    "Hemsworth brings the right approach to the lead role, as he boasts the character’s arrogance but manages the heroic side as well, and he handles some subtle comedy well. Portman can be stiff and mannered in other parts, but she seems loose and engaging as Thor’s putative love interest.

    Given the way the comics could tend toward the self-serious, I was happy to see the light comedy on display here. These elements don’t feel self-conscious, as they fit the rest of the film well and add some levity to the often somber material. Unlike the excessively jokey Iron Man 2, Thor comes across as natural and maintains a positive balance."

    The comedy's less well-integrated in "Dark World" but at least it's not the goofy yuk-fest of "Ragnarok"...
     
    Luke The Drifter likes this.
  2. GregM

    GregM Forum Resident

    Location:
    Daddyland, CA
    But that's why Ragnarok worked so well. It was being set up as the most serious, heavy-handed story of the trilogy. The goofy, hit-you-over-the-head humor was totally surprising and welcome. After a very hearfelt, serious discussion with the Valkyrie girl, when Thor sought to escape, he took the ball Hulk was playing with, and chucked it at the window. Rather than break, the window sent it bouncing back directly at Thor and it knocked him down. Didn't see that coming. I laughed harder and more frequently than at any other Marvel film. The humor just worked. Yeah, maybe it was goofy, but in a good way.
     
    alexpop and budwhite like this.
  3. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Obviously we're firmly in agree to disagree territory! :D

    I'm certainly not averse to comedy in superhero movies, but it needs to fit the character... :shrug:
     
    Crowes72 and lightbulb like this.
  4. alexpop

    alexpop Power pop + other bad habits....

    Chris Hemsworth's Hulk, comedy genius. Eric Bana excelled at Hulk in drama mode.
     
  5. vince

    vince Stan Ricker's son-in-law

    It's gonna tuff to be 'serious';
    it looks like he gets 'picked-up' by the Guardians!
     
  6. alexpop

    alexpop Power pop + other bad habits....

    More silly eye patch stuff.
     
  7. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Er, you know Hemsworth never played the Hulk, right? :help:
     
  8. GregM

    GregM Forum Resident

    Location:
    Daddyland, CA
    I'll bite. The character is pretentious, speaks in flawless English, has a perfect physique, overbearing sense of justice and is portrayed as invincible and an exceptional warrior. Having a big ball bouncing off the window and knocking him down fits the character because it makes him seem more human and relatable.
     
  9. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    A) There are less idiotic ways to make Thor "human and relatable"
    B) Who says Thor should be "human and relatable"? He's a god, for Odin's sake! Part of the gig is to be overbearing and invincible, not some buffoon who cries at the prospect of a haircut and who gets balls bounced off of his head!

    Not every character has to be Peter Parker! :shh:
     
  10. GregM

    GregM Forum Resident

    Location:
    Daddyland, CA
    Well, humans are more frail and tend to show it, so getting knocked on one's butt might be not be so idiotic.
    Who says? Probably the writers, producers, director and all the studio's marketing people who realize it's important to have the audience relate to your main character.

    Of course, but there needs to be a strategy to make each superhero more humorous, human and relatable.
     
  11. Chazro

    Chazro Forum Resident

    Location:
    West Palm Bch, Fl.
    In the books, I didn't care for it when there was a frog Thor, and don't get me started on Beta Ray Bill with the horseskull face! A character that I thought was perfect for Thor when he was 1st introduced was Hercules. As a kid, I knew of Hercules way before I ever heard of Thor. When they brought him 'in' with Zeus and Olympus it was big deal to me. That original Hercules storyline, along with ol' Herc himself, would make a great Thor movie. Enough with the jokes already!;)
     
  12. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Again, why? Why do all superheroes have to be that way? Why can't some be humorless, imperious and aloof? :confused:
     
  13. GregM

    GregM Forum Resident

    Location:
    Daddyland, CA
    Because fewer people enjoy that kind of movie, box office performance will be poor and there will be no sequel. Not Marvel's goal.
     
    alexpop likes this.
  14. alexpop

    alexpop Power pop + other bad habits....

    Maybe his brother will get the gig.:laugh:
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2018
  15. Cause people wouldn't stop complaining about Man Of Steel and Marvel noticed.
     
    Stormrider77 and vince like this.
  16. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    In the first 2 movies, Thor was pretty much the way I described, and yet those films did well. Thor didn't need to be turned into a wacky buffoon for the films to do well.

    One could view Wonder Woman and Black Panther as not-very-relatable or funny and yet their movies did well.

    Captain America is pretty serious and not especially relatable and yet his movies did well.

    People often gripe about how the Dark Knight flicks were too somber and serious and yet they made massive $$$.

    Not every character needs to be turned into Peter Parker or Tony Stark. You seem to espouse that every superhero be wacky and funny and bumbling...
     
  17. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    The problem with "Man of Steel" was that it changed the character people knew too much. In the average fan's eyes, Superman is a light character as shown in the Donner film, not some brooding mope.

    DC tried to "Dark Knight-ify" Superman and it didn't work.

    There's room for all sorts of superhero movies. What works for Iron Man or Ant-Man or Spider-Man doesn't necessarily work for Batman or Wonder Woman or Thor.

    If people enjoy "Ragnarok", that's great - despite my complaints about tone, I still find entertainment value in it.

    I just don't get the defense that the film "had to" be a wacky spoof to succeed and that Marvel "has to" make Thor some kind of semi-Average Joe... :confused:
     
    Stormrider77 likes this.
  18. Luke The Drifter

    Luke The Drifter Forum Resident

    Location:
    United States
    I think Man of Steel is excellent. And I think it is getting somewhat of a reappraisal. They just need to do a sequel, and have him be developed into the character we know and love.
     
  19. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits and Abbie: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    "BvS" was the de facto sequel to "MoS".

    I think DC/WB are leery of Superman standalone movies at this point, given the less than stellar reactions to "MoS" and "Returns".

    Supes is probably stuck in multi-hero movies for the time being...
     
  20. Michael Rose

    Michael Rose Forum Resident

    Location:
    Davie,Fl
    I haven't seen Ragnarok but it intend to this weekend. I've seen most of the MCU stuff and I wanted to watch this with my kids. They've seen the Guardian flicks and a couple of other MCU titles. Is there a prerequisite flick(s) before watching? They're familiar with the major characters.
     
  21. vince

    vince Stan Ricker's son-in-law

    I'd say there's about 10 minutes of the last Thor to get some of the backstory for the funny 'reenactment', at the beginning..
    Other than that, if you've seen the first "Avengers" movie, you know all about Loki.
     
  22. Michael Rose

    Michael Rose Forum Resident

    Location:
    Davie,Fl
    cool thx.
     
  23. jpelg

    jpelg Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Elm City
    I have to admit, this exchange cracked me up:

    Thor> If you knew where (Odin) was, why didn’t you call me?
    Dr Strange> (blah, blah, blah)...and you don’t have a phone.
    Thor> No, I don’t have a phone, but you could have sent an electronic letter. It’s called an "e-mail".
    Dr Strange> Yeah, do you have a computer?
    Thor> (deadpan face) No. What for?
     
    alexpop likes this.
  24. genesim

    genesim Forum Resident

    Location:
    St. Louis
    Marvel movies are so darn fun.

    Excellent 3D btw. Well worth seeking out, pain in the ass that it is.
     
  25. The Zodiac

    The Zodiac God's Lonely Man

    I was never a fan of Thor comics. And I didn't bother watching the first two Thor films as I have little interest in the character and his godliness. But I gave this one a shot because it looked fun. And it was fun, though it was also a little dumb at times. I'm might give the first two films a shot now, just for the sake of being completely 100% up to date with the Marvel Cinematic Universe (film realm). I hope Thor gets his hammer back because it feels wrong not to have it featured.

    I also just watched Black Panther for the first time over the weekend. All these movies are fine, but I also find myself tiring of the predictable story arcs we've come to expect from a Marvel film. LOUD quiet LOUD LOUD quiet LOUD oh no! tears! quiet CRAZY ASS LOUD, high-five, trailer scene. I look forward to "Avengers Infinity War" (which has not yet been spoiled for me so SHHHHHH!) and hope there is a tidy way to get off this conveyor belt once I'm really truly tired of the ride. And I'm also not sure I'd want to keep following these adventures if certain actors got replaced.
     

Share This Page