Thor: Ragnarok trailer

Saw the Thor film and definitely thought it was the best of the trilogy. I thought the dialogue went a bit over board with the humor and that coupled with some of the particular environments really gave it a Guardians Of The Galaxy feel at times. I ’d about three times, the action was good and despite the multiple story lines it didn’t feel rushed or badly paced. I think it’s about a 6.8/10.

Stick around for the mid credit and after credits scenes.

 

That"s a bit obvious now, dude.

 

Well now it’s not only obvious but certain for anyone who wanted to know if they needed to stick around after the credits. In fact I’m pretty sure one of the more recent MCU films didn’t do an after credits scene. I think it was GOTG2.

 

Marvel trying too hard to make Thor into Guardians of the Galaxy.
Especially trying to make Thor himself just like Peter Quill / Starlord.

Cate Blanchett was soooooo 'look out behind youuu' pantomime villainess; clearly the weakest character.

Valkyrie was boring...should have been a blonde muscular woman.....not some little black girl with back-chat.

Mark Ruffalo: where did the ultimate uber-gay/camp "oh mah gawwwwd, you guysss!" lisping accent appear from???
Sounds NOTHING like he did in The Avengers.
Utterly weird.

Tom Hiddleston did his usual Loki schtick.

Otherwise it was entertainment.

7/10

 

WAAAAAYYY MOOOREE!!!

Iron-Man 1 made $535 million worldwide, $318 million domestically. Iron-man 2 made $623 million globally, $312 million domestically and Iron-Man 3 took a whooping $1.2 billion worldwide with $409 million domestically. It is the third most successful Marvel film after the two Avengers movies.

 

Shocking...I thought it was terrible.

Thor Ragnarok is a very entertaining film, but too much humour for me. I prefer my superhero films to be dark...and if any film should have been dark it should have been this one. I agree with Dark Magus in that they seemed to be trying too hard to make this like GOTG.

Still...I'd give it an 8/10

 

I agree with some of your observations, except for Blanchet's performance: she was chewing the scenery with such gusto it was a delight to watch. Hela was definitely the most interesting character here. Also agree with Ruffalo's phoned performance. WTF happened to him? The Valkyrie chick was okay but I didn't buy it for a second that she used to be a Valkyrie...there were a couple of scenes were she almost did a little head bobbing...very un-Asgardian.

 

What does the film quality has to do with the box office? Those Transformers films are horribly awful and still make billions of dollars. The brand sells regardless of quality.

As for Thor: Ragnarok, I'll do a review tomorrow. I am too tired now.

 

I agree completely...down to the un-asgardian head bobbing. They should have left the Valkyrie as a blonde Norwegian looking woman.

 

Yeah I thought Blanchet was good too and I also agree that Ruffalo mailed in his performance. I also didn’t like the actress who played the Valkeryie either, she was unattractive and felt miscast. The funny thing was I thought the Hulk looked like he was CGI’d from Josh Brolin’s face more than Ruffalo’s.

I think Ironman 3 did well because of the success of The Avengers. The Avengers was such a high octane film that people were hoping for more and thought they would get it from IM3.

I also thought the Matt Damon cameo was a nice touch and Jeff Goldblum’s character was pretty funny.

 

Interesting.
Im not being argumentative for the sake of it but I honestly felt Blanchett had some of the worst dialog ever. Just totally out-of-place with who she was supported to be.
You really don't think the character was way over-campy?
I'd put it on the same level as Oscar Issac's Apocalypse and Kurt Russell's Ego The Living Planet: stupidly over-powerful and cheesy.
(come on panchy - don let her skin-tight leather costume cloud your judgement)

 

They were accurate with her costume though!

 

I didn’t like how she was able to catch Thor’s hammer throw and then crush it with her bare hands before she even entered Asgard which was supposedly the source of her power. Later on she’s fighting Thor on nearly an even level. So if judging by how she stood up to Thor’s hammer throw and her ability to destroy it, she should have exceeded Thor’s strength by a tremendous margin.

 

Spoilers....


I didn’t get how Thor so easily defeated the fire God but when they unleashed him on Asgard he destroyed Hela. Somebody has to explain that shit to me.

Hela seemed invincible

 

Good points.

Also, is Thor's hammer, Mjölnir now gone permanently?
Did this ever happen in the comics?

No. It' an integral part of the character.
Pointless without it.

 

Thor: Ragnarok Third is the charm for the God of Thunder trilogy as Marvel finally delivers a fun-filled crowd pleaser in this probably last Thor title. Chris Hemsworth finally gets out of the ultra serious mode he has been directed to portray Thor up to now and demonstrates he has enough chops to tackle comedy. We get some pleasant surprises early in the film as when Thor witnesses an Asgardian play honoring Loki's fake demise. The actors in that play are Chris Hemsworth older brother Luke, as Thor, Jurassic Park's Dr. Grant, Sam Neill as Odin and an almost unrecognizable Matt Damon as Loki (which is a shout-out to 'Dogma' where he portrayed the fallen angel Loki!). The obligatory Stan Lee cameo is a riot as the barber who cuts Thor's hair. The film is filled with enough special effects and fantastic locations to please the most arden scifi/comicbook fans. Cate Blanchet's Hela is, without doubt, MCU best villain to date as she conquers by her own hand and enjoys the carnage. Her over-the-top, borderline campy performance is in tune with the tone of this film and delivers every line and every gesture with such commanding presence you can't take your eyes off her. Mark Ruffalo on the other hand seemed like he was not enjoying this job at all. He basically was spiting his lines and came out as uninteresting which is a big contrast of his performance in the two Avengers films. While the film is not without its flaws (as other posters here have pointed out), it is entertaining enough to make you leave the movie house with a smile on your face. My biggest complain wasn't with film itself, but the movie theater I watched it: apparently they replaced the projector's lightbulb with a cheap low voltage one and for the most part it was difficult to discern what was happening on the screen when there were not-so-bright scenes. I still I enjoyed this film. 8.5/10

 

Worst dialogue ever? out-of-place? Give some samples 'cause I didn't saw that. Overly campy? Over-the-top and occasionally semi-campy, yes. But not way over-campy like Ming The Merciless or tv's CatWoman.

 

He defeated him with his hammer plus the Eternal Flame that revived him made him stronger as this flame is almost as powerful as an Infinity Stone. The Eternal Flame made him more powerful than he was before which explains how easily he swatted away Hulk like an insignificant insect.

 

An even bigger question. Isn’t Thor the God of Thunder? Why did they act like he was the God of lightning?

Great review and I would have totally bitched about that dark screen and even would have asked for a refund.

 

Exactly.
So:
* no hammer
* no helmet
* no cape
* no hair
* no right-eye
* no thunder

Fuckin shit character now.

 

Okay I'll concede that point and replace it with this more objective observation: re-watch Thor, The Avengers, Thor: The Dark World and The Avengers: Age of Ultron and take note how Thor, Loki and any other Asgardians speak in terms of vocabulary and grammar: all very 'olde-worlde' as you'd expect.

Then compare all if that to the hip, everyday 21st Century sarcasm, irony and hyperbole they use in Thor: Ragnarok.

I can't pick exact lines because I only watched on Saturday night but at the time I just noted: "that just sounds lame"


(As is turning Thor into Peter Quill/Starlord)

 

Its pretty obvious. They know the first two Thor films were pretty average, so they went in a different more fun direction this time. To be honest Marvel films have been trending in the direction of witty, sarcastic humor + action =$$$$$$ for quite some time now. Films like GOTG 1 & 2, Dead Pool, even Antman. With Thor having so much success you can bet they’re only going to double down on that formula now.

Hopefully this won’t be the case to that extreme with Avengers Infinity War. The studios probably realize how hyped everyone already is for the film and that the Avengers films always turn a big profit so hopefully they won’t need to go so hard with the comedy.

 

There’s no thunder without lightning.

 

Also, is it just me, or was the fire God reminiscent of the Balrog in Lord of the Rings ( “you shall not pass!”)?

 

I’m not buying that explanation

 

I agree with your comment but like I said, I gave it a 7/10 but for some minor irks - this was one of them. (bear in mind that my ratings are along the lines of 3/10 Poor, 5/10 Average, 9/10 Excellent, etc)

I felt at the time Thor and Thor: The Dark World were above-average - okay they had their bad moments, but I still think they hold up in the overall MCU compared with say, Iron-Man III (6/10), Doctor Strange (8/10), Ant-Man (6/10) and Spider-man Homecoming (5/10) of which are the other ´like em or hate em´ movies (IMO - and Ive only watched each of them once).
Plus, both Thors have been hits at the box-office ($400-$600m)

Okay, your last point - toning down the humour for Avengers: Infinity War.
That´s going to be tricky being as the Guardians Of The Galaxy are in it and it follows on the back of that and the new Thor movie, both of which have focussed on more humour.


It´ll still kick ass though.

 

Yeah it was somewhat.
When I first saw Surtur I thought ´Mephisto?!´ but then he´s more of a Doctor Strange / Silver Surfer world villain

Surtur:


Mephisto:

 

He now shoots lightning bolts all over the place like Spider-Man's Electro!!!













WTF?????

 

I still have that #3 issue of Silver Surfer from the 60's. Hands down best Surfer story to date.

 

That’s a cop out and you should be ashamed for even accepting that shit. If there isn’t one without the other than how come he can’t hurt his enemies ears with Thunder claps too? Had they done that than yeah, I’d give them the benefit of the doubt on the one without the other stuff but to me they’re just trying to pull the wool over our eyes because both his sister and dad ask him what he’s the god of and we never actually got an answer but apparently it’s lightning.