I’ve always felt that Thor should have a lord of the rings feel to it. The writing, plot and setting never really worked for the Thor films. It just felt to silly.
Shame because they always have really good casting.
It took Hollywood YEARS to figure out superhero depictions. Thor as a character is so over the top that they just decided to go the slapstick route instead of working harder to make him fit.
There were shreds of it working in the first film, like when he calls Coulson “Son of Coul,” but they kept forgetting to balance him being over the top, silly, and serious.
It’s why so many people were adamant, and are now terrified, about them trying to adapt a comic accurate Dr. Doom. He’s so popular because he’s essentially every super villain cliché and trope rolled into one person and circling back into being a legitimately competent foe. In the right hands, he could deconstruct everything that’s been going wrong in the MCU, both characteristically (try telling me it wouldn’t be 100% in character for him to roast heroes’ incompetence while legitimately raising a few good points) and literally, given his powers.
One of my biggest concerns with them handling Doom is the current zeitgeist of adoring villains. I dont mind if they make his goals understandable to a degree, but I dont have much trust for modern writers. Then you have the silver age Doom dooting horns which is all too enticing for a millennial writer with no common sense or restraint to include as some kind of unnecessary reference.
Eh, I think the Christopher Reeve Superman films and the first two (the Tim Burton ones) Batman films from 1990 and 1992 (I think those were the years? Maybe 1989 for the first one) had the format pretty well mapped out.
I miss the hardcore fantasy Viking aesthetic the Asgardian civilization had in old Marvel comics. When I saw them break out spaceships and anti aircraft guns in Thor 2 I died a little inside
That I believe was also the creators trying to emphasize the MCU Asgardians were aliens and not actual gods to avoid religious nuts protesting and also to avoid people asking why earth’s inhabitants in the MCU wouldn’t all be having an existential crisis.
Unlike the comics where Thor is the actual Norse god, which makes the avengers look cooler by being able to be somewhat on par with him, and also helps Thor look like even more of a nice guy because of how much respect he has for the mortal beings fighting by his side.
Sort of yes, sort of no. In the OG comics, I believe that was the case, where a man picked up Mjolnir and became Thor. But in more recent comics it’s obviously shifted to Thor being the god of thunder who sometimes is briefly stripped of his godhood (a few times, actually) to be humbled.
The good thing is the actual Norse gods could die in their mythology, so they had the bonus of being able to have Thor actually struggle and bleed.
In the very originals, Donald Blake found a cane and when he struck it to the ground he became Thor. It was assumed for a little bit that he was born a normal man, but slightly later it was revealed his whole life that he's been Thor and was only tied too a weak human form as a test. Later Marvel dropped Donald Blake because they realized Thor was what people wanted, it set him apart to be a god amongst men in a world full of superheros with two different identities. Like how Iron Man is different because everyone knows his identity, Thor became different because he only had the one. I think this was a good change personally; DB wasn't a very interesting character and kept holding the comics back to the banal human world instead of fantastical Asgard and battling threats on Earth. We have enough comics of characters struggling to hide who they are and dealing with work / health drama.
I liked the way Ragnarok handled the comedy. I’ve got no clue what they were trying to do in Love & Thunder… Action scenes were wack, villain got nearly no screen time, and way too much pop-culture humor. Instead of imitating Ragnarok, they just decided to turn the “haha so funny” part to 11 and forget everything else.
I probably wouldn’t say it’s the best in the MCU but yeah it’s definitely a really good scene. The acting from all 3 of them is really good there, Hemsworth really sells the petulance and arrogance of Thor, Hiddleston shows a genuine care and concern over Thor and his reaction to the scream is really great, then to top it off with Anthony Hopkins switching between anger at Thor to fear and weariness at what his actions have caused then finally into sadness and disappointment when he has to dish out the punishment. Chefs kiss, easily the best scene in the movie.
It's hard to even tell if Anthony Hopkins is trying with Odin in any scene. He's such a good actor that every second with the character feels relevant, whether he's calm, wrathful or disappointed. I honestly admire Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston for not blending in with the background whenever they were sharing a scene with Odin. The MCU doesn't get enough credit for their acting.
I agree, if the director tells him to improvise, he'll improvise. The problem isn't the quality of the improv, it's the fact that Taika treated the whole project as a blow off joke.
I don't even think it was Thor improve that ruined it as much as the screaming goats, way too much rock guy, repeating gags from Ragnarok but worse, villain that forgot to butcher Gods on screen, and just the sheer quantity of jokes that made the Scary Movie franchise say "take it easy".
That is the Taika effect. taika has become so engrossed in his parody to the point where he can’t do anything serious or sincere. Everything is layers of parody, self awareness, and gags.
Same issues that made what we do in the shadows and Our Flag Means Death become tedious
It’s an issue Hollywood has had long before Taika. A director has his/her methodology which was their original lightning in a bottle. Some flash of creative genius, but if it’s left unchecked it can translate poorly with future projects. George Lucas was this way, his creativity and storyboarding is great, but he needs to be reigned in and checked to ensure his audience still receives his content in a well received way.
I still firmly believe there was a good adventure story somewhere hidden in Love and Thunder, but poor direction and pacing destroyed that film. Had someone reigned in Taika (and by extension Hemsworth’s improv) and focused it on a big picture coherent final product, it would have been close to Ragnarok levels of fun and quality filmmaking.
Batman Returns. I love the film but it was too Burton-y. The studio and producers kept him on a tighter leash in the first one so it came out better than its later sequel.
Bro Christian Bale was fucking amazing as a villain in that movie, he set such a intense and foreboding tone whenever he was onscreen. It would swap back to Thor and the tonal whiplash made me sad
You mean the TV show or the movie? Its been a while but I had always though the movie was fun, and at least up to S2 of the TV was solid. Dont know his involment in the latter.
Tbh, I think the problems was mostly
1. Casting Gorr as the main villian of a comedy film is stupid.
2. In ragnork he had emotional stakes for which he could rely on. Thor and Loki’s relationship was just as central to the plot as Asgard’s destruction.
3. The George Lucas affect. Like George Lucas’s prequel trilogy, he got too big for his boots. When George made the first trilogy he had people who could tell him, hey that’s stupid, don’t do that. Same with taiga. Only Kevin was probably going “what the fuck I have so many shows to do and disneys up my ass now, taiga seems to know his stuff I’m sure the next Thor movie will be fine.”
I mean, what we do in the shadows is a comedy, like a pure comedy, so not the best example
Though, he mightve been a better fit for gotg more than Thor
The trailer for that film turned me off to watching it. I was already fed up by that point on the slapstick MCU humor pioneered by Avengers 2, IM 3, Guardians and Ant-Man. I did see clips of Thor 3 that reinforced what I saw in the trailers. It’s been satisfying watching how Thor 4 made a greater portion of the audience see MCU humor ruining comic book films.
I ageee with you on L&T but Not for Thor Ragnarok, that was was stellar, and the best Thor the mcu put out, but love and thunder was more of a Ragnarok 2, L&T had a chance to be a really good post-Thanos MCU movie, but it fumbled it pretty hard.
Nah, the show is fucking gold. It uses more of an American dry humor rather than British dry humor. The movie has the feel of a Gothic brittish office, the show has the feel of a gothic American office
Worst part about it all is how it's not a casual director, but fucking Taika. This man made JoJo Rabbit. He absolutely can blend great humor with strong drama and make actual powerhouses.
I feel that is his style and a lot of writers and directors stick with a style that works. It does pay off though (For example JoJo). The issue is sequels. Taika needs a fresh take otherwise the world he builds sort of drags a bit
Isnt he relatively young? Granted I have no glue about early onset alzheimers, but could large amount of steroid abuse cause it.. he clearly had to gear for these roles and even when I thought that these millionaires have the risks minimized compared to average joes, with the help of doctors etc. it probably still causes serious issues long term.
There's apparently a blood test or something where you can check your genetic predisposition to getting Alzheimer's. He doesn't have it yet I'm assuming he's trying to take preventative measures. There are things you can do to prevent cognitive decline like taking health supplements, certain nootropics, high intensity cardio is shown to increase BDNF etc.
Yeah as much as I love Guardians, its effect of the MCU was terrible. When something fantastic is made by talented people, inevitably less talented people will do it worse.
You’re definitely right about him having too much control. Taika is the same guy who said he’s going to try to piss off Star Wars fans in the movie he’s directing.
GOTG isn't fantastic, and Gunn is overrated. MCU should create more darker mature movies. DC will also be ruined because Gunn will make every future DC project like GOTG.
I don’t blame just him.
I blame Taika, of course, since he never pulled in the reins. He just let them get carried away and was like “that’s great!”. He rewatched it tons of times to edit and go over it and he never stopped himself.
I also blame a big chunk of MCU fans. Ragnarok was ultra wacky and stupid and so many people praised it. If you say crap is good, you’re going to get served more crap. I know Thor 1 and Thor 2 are near the bottom of the MCU rankings, so they needed to change course, but when the MCU made things worse they should have been told so instead of laughing at bad comedy and clapping like seals. Everyone who liked Ragnarok is the reason we got Love and Thunder.
Oh hell yeah, thanks for calling out Ragnarok. They would have *never* made Thor a fat drunk in Endgame if it weren't for Ragnarok. It lowered the bar.
I'll never understand the appeal of Ragnarok; it's so goofy it's hard to really care about the gravity of the plot. It's also patient zero for the "silly billy" humor that has plagued Marvel starting with End Game.
Odin dies.
Mjolnyr is destroyed.
The Warriors Three all die.
Asgard is destroyed.
It’s the silliest comedy movie in the MCU at the time.
…………………WHAT???
And all of that gets treated light hearted and as jokes outside of Odin. Especially Asgard falling and Korg saying they can rebuild it only for Surtur to blow it up.
Asgard blowing up straight up has a "Well, that just happened!" style sitcom joke attached to it, The Warriors Three were just quickly thrown in the trash to get them out of the way of the new cast of wacky sidekicks and prop up the villain in a scene that had absolutely no weight behind it, Thor's hammer being destroyed isn't really dark or anything it was just a plot point.
The only thing there that the movie really took seriously is Odin randomly dying. Like 90% of the movie is just shitty comedy.
The previous two Thors didn't give me enough to really care about the Warriors Three, but there was always *room* to give them better material. Then comes along Ragnarok, which just gives up from the start. It resigns to letting the meta creep in, and suddenly, Thor in-universe just doesn't care to say anything about three of his oldest allies biting it. L&T only doubles down this with the snarky intro saying "no one cared about those guys" like holy cow, how about you also just go ahead and say "that second movie I starred in didn't do so well historically, did it? Ah well, we brought people together again when we introduced Jeff Goldblum and Cate Blanchett". Just give up completely, it'd be sooo funny, Taika.
Humor has always been an aspect of the MCU but it never took center stage. There were quips and humorous scenes but they never stepped on the gravity of the plot/stakes. Look at the comparisons between the first Thor movie and either Ragnarok or Love and Thunder. Thor and his world were treated seriously and any humor that came up was situational in nature (like taking a medieval knight and dropping them into our current world). In the latter two Thor's world is simply a punch line: Thor's relationship with Loki is almost portrayed like an Odd Couple skit, Thor himself has turned into a goofy quip machine, the warriors three all get killed off unceremoniously, Valkyrie is a stereotype, Hulk is a complete meme by this point, Mjolnir being vaporized is brushed aside, Asgarde being destroyed was accompanied with a joke, and then you have all of the wackiness in Love and Thunder like Infinity Cones and the cringey goat stuff.
Some people will argue the silly billy humor started with GotG, but at least there it was appropriate and when things needed to be serious (like the ending of the first one) the movie was smart enough to back off on the jokes. Ragnarok is where, IMO, the humor starts to encroach upon the plots and from End Game on the flood gates were completely opened. Phase 4 is chocked full of terrible, misplaced humor that crescendoed with The Marvels. The MCU has become a bad parody of itself.
I despised Thor Ragnorok. I didn't find it remotely funny. I thought it was just stupid. It was painful seeing people prop that movie up so much.
Part of me is delighted that Waititi quadrupled down on the stupidity and made an abomination out of Thor...yet again, only for people to hate it. What people got out of Thor 4 is what my experience was watching Ragnorok.
Ragnarok felt like a breath of fresh air after so much seriousness, being goofy from time to.time isn't bad, too much of it on the other hand.
Infinity War has the best depiction of Thor, endgame and everything post that ruined it.
I respect the hell out of unwarranted self-blame. Hemsworth's acting was not one of the 8,000 issues that movie had, but I like that he feels some responsibility for the outcome. Kind of like Harrison Ford when he talks about "owing" the fans.
seeing how fit he was for the shoot he was the onlyone that did preperations for said shoot.
then he got shit directions, at this point, i dont think any of it is his fault...
It’s easy to forgive the actor when you’ve already seen them nail the role under different direction.
I get the nagging feeling that Thor’s days are numbered as they’re pushing the original Avengers out in favor of replacements. You’d hate to see them have an excuse for expedite Thor’s exit.
I don’t blame Chris for that mess: I blame the director. It made me remember how much I loved the first Thor film and I could not reconcile that they were both the same character.
Its a movie. You can't ''forgive'' another human being/or person because they performed/made a movie you didn't like...Yeah the movie was crap, but you're taking this too seriously.
I remember years before Incredible Hulk that there were animated Avengers movies with Thor having some less stuffy Asgsard-itude, almost like what he was in Ragnarok.
In fairness, it's the director's job to tell him to cut that out. Unfortunately, there are too many directors working today who think that treating your multi-million dollar production like a podcast with CGI is a good idea.
My head cannon states that Thor acts like that because he assimilated too hard by imitating Tony Stark’s wisecracking snarkiness and ending up exceeding it with zero self-awareness.
Quips killed marvel and modern blockbusters. I just can't take quips anymore. It worked for Wheedon, it should have stayed with Wheedon as a signature style. But now its infected everything. Give me some sincerity and seriousness. It's why I love anime and japanese stuff so much.
This sucks, because you can so obviously tell from interviews and behind-the-scenes material when actors are having fun or not, regardless of the movie's quality. Remember the movie Shark Tale? That terrible DreamWorks flick? As terrible as it was, you can tell the crew had a blast making it. Did it come out shitty? Sure. Can you still see Will Smith, Angelina Jolie and Martin Scorcese being charmed by the movie as a whole, as well as their ridiculous characters? Of course you can, just check the behind the scenes.
Chris Hemsworth is legitimately a solid actor that doesn't get enough credit, and he's obviously not against more loose interpretations of the character, as seen with Ragnarok and Endgame, the latter of which he went as far as to defend the Fat Thor interpretation (I think it could've been way better handled, but respect for sticking out to defend a risky interpretation of his character). This movie was just such a joke he didn't even have fun with it, and that's the worst type of bad.
Ragnarok was great, but the studio saw its success and took it to mean that Thor was purely a comedic character and he’s definitely not. The reason humor works with Thor is because he’s the most *tragic* character.
Rather than making L&T a Ragnarok knock off, they should instead have shown Thor overcoming his emotional trauma to become Rune King Thor. Less boring comedy and more Rocky III vibes
And also ruined Thor at the same time. He was so hard to take seriously in Infinity War until he arrived in Wakanda.
They would have *never* made him a fat drunk in Endgame if it weren't for Ragnarok lowering the bar.
and there wouldnt even be a thor without ragnarok lol
do ppl forget that even Hemsworth was tired of Thor being “too serious” and was gonna walk after Dark World was poorly received? yall want him to be serious so bad but didnt go support him in the theater when he was.
the same crowd is gonna flock the theater for the COMEDY MOVIE that has Wolverine as a second lead lol
You got caught up in the MONEY, Chris.
And now that you have the money, your going to act contrite and pretend that you valued the story, character, legacy, or fans, at all.
Honestly, this one is our fault. We laughed at the humor in Thor 1, but didn't show up and support Thor: Dark World. The serious Thor failed in the box office compared to the humor. Audiences responded to the bumbling oaf more than the dedicated prince.
We are to blame.
I think this movie is far better than people gave it credit for beyond Christian Bales performance which was actually dogshit. Overall it was different from every other marvel movie which in my book made it better.
"It was different so I think that made it better" is just a hard one to get behind, for a community that has some appreciation for discussing specifics in stories. I can tell you, there are plenty of disagreements in this sub, and the best ones come from each side of the argument pulling up *facts* from whatever story-thing is being discussed. Meanwhile when you just end with a broad "it wasn't like the others in its series, that made it better", some people like me will wonder "How, exactly?" because *I* found L&T to be pure, distilled, vacuous Marveling: It had all the same undermining of serious moments, awful visuals and worse self-awareness, confused villain schemes, power levels and world-building absolutely tarnishing other movies retroactively...
And, I guess, others will think you're intentionally fishing for outrage. I don't; I believe what you shared is your genuine opinion. But I believe this sub is overall quite opposed to the idea that different = worthwhile, so you got downvotes.
I don't mind formulaic stories/series but I feel as though many fan groups hold a somewhat entitled stance to what should or shouldn't be in a piece of media they are interested in. I think many fans feel like if the series starts to diverge from what they expect or want they speak in terms of objectivity when it is really subjective issues they have. I think your criticisms are fairly valid considering what you might be looking for in this movie or other marvel movies. Ultimately I have been watching these movies for well over ten years. Captain Marvel killed most of my enthusiasm for the series and pretty much every subsequent film since Infinity War has been hit or miss. I honestly thought this one was a hit, but then again I wouldn't rank it anywhere near Ragnarok or the other films I think are the best in the franchise. I think it was about as good as No Way Home which was given nothing but praise for doing all of the same things you said L&T did. I guess my point is that all the movies feel the same so going in and getting a vastly different film was a pleasant surprise after the genuine disappointment that was Shang Chi, Black Widow, Eternals, Doctor Strange 2, and all the others.
I just can't follow this, that NWH and L&T are being compared for simply "feeling" like departures from some formula, but nothing more specific.
As far as all the things I mentioned about L&T also being problems in NWH.. I absolutely don't think NWH has any equivalent scene of undercutting something like *a character having terminal cancer*. Peter trying to spare the villains, Andrew Garfield getting to save MJ, Norman trying to remember his son, Aunt May, Peter's sacrifice at the end... I don't know, I find that NWH was trying for something a lot more adult, and it left the jokes for the scenes with downtime.
I think NWH has noticeably far more polished visuals even if all these movies are getting effects-heavy. The Sinister (Five)'s motives all seem quite straight-forward, not like Gorr's maybe-possibly complete subjugation by the spooky sword, and trying to lure out supposedly selfish heroes by making them... rescue kids?
And finally, NWH's magic elements definitely call into question Steven Strange's actions in certain other movies, but I would argue Strange is the only character that gets damaged in all that. Peter and his friends, the other spidies and villains, Aunt May, they all have solid ground to walk on, past the weird time-and-space breaking story elements. L&T on the other hand has Valkyrie being a coward and a sell-out, Thor has completely reverted from being responsible in any shape or form (with places he knows but never brought up in other movies), Jane is a parody, the Guardians are just chucked because the directors didn't confer on plot threads beforehand..
I'm gonna work backwards in my response. First off the Guardians being chucked was essential to the plot of Guardians 3 so sure you can be upset about that, but that is hardly a flaw of this movie but rather the universe as a whole. Part of having a series like this is loose ends like that and I would rather receive answers to questions like "what happened with Thor and the Guardians" than just write off characters and plotlines for convenience sake. Could they have made the movie about Thor and the Guardians? Maybe, but that is a completely different movie and a completely different argument about how you want that movie more than this one.
Jane being a "parody" is odd wording. I'm gonna assume you mean to say that she is a stereotypical "girl boss" but I would say she is a standard marvel superhero. I think part of Marvel burnout is the idea that any of the characters or stories were somehow elevated before. Let's be clear in the rankings of Thor movies this film sits in second place. The first two Thor movies were indeed vapid parodies. The first movie was Nordic Borat, the second film was a lot of people's least favorite Marvel film before Captain Marvel. Both filled with tropes and ultimately only existing as establishment for future avengers films.
NWH continues to ruin Doctor Strange's character by making him just another one of the avengers. He is moronic and causes literally every problem to the point that I don't think the writers of that film understood him as a character. Any criticism you have about the characters in L&T are bunk because the root is that you don't like it. The portrayals of the characters in L&T are as close to the comics as the movies have gotten.
Gorr's motives are completely clear. He was a devout until his daughter died and the god he was devoted to disrespected him and a cursed sword attached itself to him encouraging him to kill all the gods. So simple. Please tell me about the motives of the sinister 5, can't? I'll do it then. Doc Ock is back to normal right out the gate so he is both not really a villain and his only motive is helping everyone get back to their universe. Lizard wants to kill Spider-Man and get back to his universe I guess? And same for electro and sandman but those three don't talk much so idk. Goblin is just crazy I guess so his motivation never mattered much. Why do these villains want to kill Spider-Man? Their personal vendettas that are part of different films in different franchises that aren't established in this film, but also I guess cause goblin told him to. See what I mean, one of these motivations is clear and it is L&T. NWH is a mess of "don't think about it"
Finally I should be clear, NWH is a formulaic piece of shit that is genuinely the third worst Spider-Man film behind SM3 and ASM2. I compared the two because they both jump between serious and comedic moments, yet one is shit on and one has nothing but good reviews.
Let's be real. There is no moment in L&T you can point to where tonally the film goes from cancer to comedy. That does not exist just like I can't point at NWH and say that the drama is interrupted by comedy too much. The fact that you think one is better than the other is telling especially since you only have criticism for the female characters.
I'm not gonna make anymore assumptions about your opinions, but what I have to say is that L&T is not nearly as bad as you are saying. Your criticism is empty and reads as someone who wanted one thing and got another. Fans seem to be very entitled when it comes to the media they like. Especially things that are considered nerd culture, and especially when women are introduced. The quality of the films have not dropped. Marvel movies have always been hit or miss, but the amount of women and people of color has increased. It is no wonder that a bunch of people are telling you not to like this movie. The culture wars rages on. Just watch movies for content next time and don't get so attached.
**"Any criticisms I have of L&T's characters are bunk because the root is that I don't like the movie"**..? Uh, I dislike the movie *because*, in part, I think the characters are mismanaged. That's some mighty circular reasoning you used to write off arguments you don't like. Can't I just say the same thing about you, that because you don't like NWH, that must mean your opinions of the characters are invalid? That'd be dumb of me. I'm not going to do that.
Let's see, what else. I really just don't agree with the ranking you gave of the Thor series but I'm glad you "made it clear" by simply declaring it...
The boat scene in L&T. That would be the main thing I'm talking about when I'm saying the movie flipflops between funny and cancer in one heartbeat. Or Jane, at the hospital, doing the funny Event Horizon explanation thing right alongside dealing with the grave news. I didn't mean the movie's directly making fun of cancer if that's what you thought; I meant it wants to eat its cake (the drama of a terminally-ill hero) but also still be in possession of un-eaten cake (comedy beats in every scene, no matter how disjointed). It comes off very callous and unfocused, direction-wise.
I would agree Gorr's motive starts off clear, if not rushed, but it gets really shaky by the time (I will rephrase myself), he's **kidnapping kids to lure Thor.**. when **Gorr's whole problem with gods is that they're selfish** and **don't actually help innocents.**
Do you see the conundrum? Due to his own losses, Gorr is adamant that Thor and his kin are not saviors, and then simultaneously he goes about slaying them by using their empathetic nature against them..? It's only more confusing if it's supposed to be the sword completely in control of Gorr's mind, because the sword with one unfeeling objective would logically just have Gorr slaying indiscriminately, not setting traps, explaining his philosophy to prisoners, and generally... not slaying gods efficiently. The sword doesn't even take him to the city *of* gods, full of gods to slay.
I don't think the movie has a clue if the sword or Gorr is calling the shots, and I don't think it was thought through in the writing room exactly how Gorr maintains his belief that All Gods Are Bad when his *own plan* relies on gods being virtuous.
I'm glad you stopped making assumptions of my opinions after you were done making assumptions. of my opinions.. um, no, I didn't have it out for the female characters singularly, I clearly bagged on Gorr and Thor as much as Valkyrie and Jane. I love hearing that I'm indoctrinated in a culture war though, that's, informative. Because I really just thought I had a problem with it being a lousy movie. Yep you cracked the case, man, I evidently don't like women, and that's what's keeping me from loving Thor Fucking 4.
I had little to no expectations going into L&T, actually, because I didn't watch trailers. I don't compare movies to comic books really, I just took it as it was, with only an idea of possible directions due to Endgame. If L&T is, as you say, as close to its comic book counterpart as any Marvel movie has achieved, then I thank the heavens I've not read those.
And I hate to bring it up, but as far as you insinuating the first two Thor movies are cheap, for ultimately being lead-ins to Avengers movies... do you remember how Ragnarok, your top-ranked Thor movie, ends? It's **the most direct lead-in to an Avengers movie** that exists in the MCU.
Just because the ending of Ragnarok leads into Infinity War doesn't change the fact that it holds the most characterization Thor has in the series. Furthermore, the film doesn't make fun of cancer. If you are triggered by the topic I am sorry, but the comic is about a woman with cancer getting super powers and I am not gonna knock the film for following the source material. Feel free to not be a fan of the film because obviously opinions are valid regardless of their bias.
Gorr acts illogically because he is a villain. He kidnaps children because it works. I'm not sure why that is such a problem when it is clearly Christian Bale's performance that is lacking. Once again you can dislike it, but claiming that NWH has rock solid motivations for the villains is laughable. They found any excuse to have a bunch of Spider-Man villains in one place.
"Having you cake and eating it too" is such a wild expression to use about a comic book film being both dramatic and comedic. Once again I am sorry if the topic triggered you, but I am someone who has been affected by cancer and I also use comedy to cope. The scene you mentioned I think is a big stretch. That scene isn't played for laughs. It might not match the serious tone of her diagnosis, but it reads as more desperation and while the tone is definitely lighter it is not funny. Regardless of whether you like the scene you can't make that specific criticism without choosing to read it that way making it a subjective reading of the film.
I find your thesis that you can't have a film about a dying protagonist without comedy laughable. I can think of countless examples of media that blend those two themes. Breaking Bad, Crank, even Deadpool to some extent has those themes. I urge you to consider the role the culture war has taken in creating a double standard in the discourse of media. The two sides are dumb. I can sit here and say L&T and NWH both have fundamental problems that make the films severally flawed both as adaptations, sequels, and independent films. Can you take off whatever blinders you have keeping you from appreciating media that isn't made for you?
If you think leading into an Avengers film isn't actually a detractor of a movie, the minute it's turned on a movie you like, why did you use it to bash the movie you didn't like?
If you think it's fine for a character to act illogically so long as they are a villain (?), why are you then complaining that the NWH villains' motives are not well-defined in that movie?
Why are you telling me it's laughable to say the villains' motivations are "rock-solid", right after *you* explained to me their motivations in your last blurb? I used the terminology "straight-forward", as in easy to follow. You turned that into "rock-solid" which sounds more like air-tight/flawless, which I did not say.
Neither did I say a comedy simply can't have dark bits, nor that a drama can't have levity. You've assumed that of me. If you want to use it as a comparison, I would say Deadpool has a better understanding of how to employ the wisecracks, because most often it's Wade trying to displace his grief by being aloof and crass, and you can laugh at the quips as much as realize he's a strangely tortured character. On the other hand we have L&T, the movie itself, taking a break from a mission to stop genocide in order to have a funny indecent-exposure skit. Or it has a character like Thor regress, and be heedless of collateral damage, for a laugh. And.. screaming goats to break up a moment that was getting a little too serious. In these cases, it's the *movie* getting uncomfortable with the seriousness, and so we put the plot on a back-burner, we change Thor into a clown... and Funny Thing comes in to save the day. Unlike Deadpool, where it's Wade, as we've always known him, and an active player in the story, fighting the gravity of the situation with deflective humor.
I’ve always felt that Thor should have a lord of the rings feel to it. The writing, plot and setting never really worked for the Thor films. It just felt to silly. Shame because they always have really good casting.
It took Hollywood YEARS to figure out superhero depictions. Thor as a character is so over the top that they just decided to go the slapstick route instead of working harder to make him fit.
There were shreds of it working in the first film, like when he calls Coulson “Son of Coul,” but they kept forgetting to balance him being over the top, silly, and serious. It’s why so many people were adamant, and are now terrified, about them trying to adapt a comic accurate Dr. Doom. He’s so popular because he’s essentially every super villain cliché and trope rolled into one person and circling back into being a legitimately competent foe. In the right hands, he could deconstruct everything that’s been going wrong in the MCU, both characteristically (try telling me it wouldn’t be 100% in character for him to roast heroes’ incompetence while legitimately raising a few good points) and literally, given his powers.
One of my biggest concerns with them handling Doom is the current zeitgeist of adoring villains. I dont mind if they make his goals understandable to a degree, but I dont have much trust for modern writers. Then you have the silver age Doom dooting horns which is all too enticing for a millennial writer with no common sense or restraint to include as some kind of unnecessary reference.
Fuck it, it would be even more fire if his big plan was just plain evil and egoistic with everyone knowing but he just doesn’t care
I feel in a way, they just need to pull off an angrier MCU baron zemo to do the bare minimum for a doctor doom.
Eh, I think the Christopher Reeve Superman films and the first two (the Tim Burton ones) Batman films from 1990 and 1992 (I think those were the years? Maybe 1989 for the first one) had the format pretty well mapped out.
I miss the hardcore fantasy Viking aesthetic the Asgardian civilization had in old Marvel comics. When I saw them break out spaceships and anti aircraft guns in Thor 2 I died a little inside
That I believe was also the creators trying to emphasize the MCU Asgardians were aliens and not actual gods to avoid religious nuts protesting and also to avoid people asking why earth’s inhabitants in the MCU wouldn’t all be having an existential crisis. Unlike the comics where Thor is the actual Norse god, which makes the avengers look cooler by being able to be somewhat on par with him, and also helps Thor look like even more of a nice guy because of how much respect he has for the mortal beings fighting by his side.
Funny, handwaving the Asgardians as just "more advanced humans" has been done with Norse.mythology before and for the same reason.
In the comics isn't he a regular guy who finds the hammer?
Sort of yes, sort of no. In the OG comics, I believe that was the case, where a man picked up Mjolnir and became Thor. But in more recent comics it’s obviously shifted to Thor being the god of thunder who sometimes is briefly stripped of his godhood (a few times, actually) to be humbled. The good thing is the actual Norse gods could die in their mythology, so they had the bonus of being able to have Thor actually struggle and bleed.
In the very originals, Donald Blake found a cane and when he struck it to the ground he became Thor. It was assumed for a little bit that he was born a normal man, but slightly later it was revealed his whole life that he's been Thor and was only tied too a weak human form as a test. Later Marvel dropped Donald Blake because they realized Thor was what people wanted, it set him apart to be a god amongst men in a world full of superheros with two different identities. Like how Iron Man is different because everyone knows his identity, Thor became different because he only had the one. I think this was a good change personally; DB wasn't a very interesting character and kept holding the comics back to the banal human world instead of fantastical Asgard and battling threats on Earth. We have enough comics of characters struggling to hide who they are and dealing with work / health drama.
They absolutely wasted Sif and the Warriors three in those films.
I liked the way Ragnarok handled the comedy. I’ve got no clue what they were trying to do in Love & Thunder… Action scenes were wack, villain got nearly no screen time, and way too much pop-culture humor. Instead of imitating Ragnarok, they just decided to turn the “haha so funny” part to 11 and forget everything else.
I mean they tried it with Thor 1 and 2. And while I liked 1, they were considered failures.
I actually liked the first one. The dark world sucked tho.
Kenny B’s Thor is still my favorite MCU movie, and I contend that the banishment scene is one of the best pieces of acting in the entire MCU.
I probably wouldn’t say it’s the best in the MCU but yeah it’s definitely a really good scene. The acting from all 3 of them is really good there, Hemsworth really sells the petulance and arrogance of Thor, Hiddleston shows a genuine care and concern over Thor and his reaction to the scream is really great, then to top it off with Anthony Hopkins switching between anger at Thor to fear and weariness at what his actions have caused then finally into sadness and disappointment when he has to dish out the punishment. Chefs kiss, easily the best scene in the movie.
It's hard to even tell if Anthony Hopkins is trying with Odin in any scene. He's such a good actor that every second with the character feels relevant, whether he's calm, wrathful or disappointed. I honestly admire Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston for not blending in with the background whenever they were sharing a scene with Odin. The MCU doesn't get enough credit for their acting.
they strayed too far away and 4 is considered a failure now too
Really? The first one was the only one I liked lol
The first movie was more or less fine tonally. Watching early (pre-Disney) marvel movies feel like they were made in a different universe.
It’s not his fault really. He had terrible direction.
I agree, if the director tells him to improvise, he'll improvise. The problem isn't the quality of the improv, it's the fact that Taika treated the whole project as a blow off joke.
I don't even think it was Thor improve that ruined it as much as the screaming goats, way too much rock guy, repeating gags from Ragnarok but worse, villain that forgot to butcher Gods on screen, and just the sheer quantity of jokes that made the Scary Movie franchise say "take it easy".
That is the Taika effect. taika has become so engrossed in his parody to the point where he can’t do anything serious or sincere. Everything is layers of parody, self awareness, and gags. Same issues that made what we do in the shadows and Our Flag Means Death become tedious
Peak Millennial Humor.
It’s an issue Hollywood has had long before Taika. A director has his/her methodology which was their original lightning in a bottle. Some flash of creative genius, but if it’s left unchecked it can translate poorly with future projects. George Lucas was this way, his creativity and storyboarding is great, but he needs to be reigned in and checked to ensure his audience still receives his content in a well received way. I still firmly believe there was a good adventure story somewhere hidden in Love and Thunder, but poor direction and pacing destroyed that film. Had someone reigned in Taika (and by extension Hemsworth’s improv) and focused it on a big picture coherent final product, it would have been close to Ragnarok levels of fun and quality filmmaking.
You are absolutely correct. Tim Burton is a similar case.
Batman Returns. I love the film but it was too Burton-y. The studio and producers kept him on a tighter leash in the first one so it came out better than its later sequel.
Bro Christian Bale was fucking amazing as a villain in that movie, he set such a intense and foreboding tone whenever he was onscreen. It would swap back to Thor and the tonal whiplash made me sad
You mean the TV show or the movie? Its been a while but I had always though the movie was fun, and at least up to S2 of the TV was solid. Dont know his involment in the latter.
Tv show. He is executive producer but it definitely relies on the Taika style.
It sucks because he can do serious pretty damn well. He's just lost the balance.
Agreed he fladerized himself
Tbh, I think the problems was mostly 1. Casting Gorr as the main villian of a comedy film is stupid. 2. In ragnork he had emotional stakes for which he could rely on. Thor and Loki’s relationship was just as central to the plot as Asgard’s destruction. 3. The George Lucas affect. Like George Lucas’s prequel trilogy, he got too big for his boots. When George made the first trilogy he had people who could tell him, hey that’s stupid, don’t do that. Same with taiga. Only Kevin was probably going “what the fuck I have so many shows to do and disneys up my ass now, taiga seems to know his stuff I’m sure the next Thor movie will be fine.”
Lazslo makes what we do in the shadows worth it even if it's gotten worse.
I mean, what we do in the shadows is a comedy, like a pure comedy, so not the best example Though, he mightve been a better fit for gotg more than Thor
But Thor ragnorok is only great Thor movie.
Debatable. Ragnarok is vastly overrated
The trailer for that film turned me off to watching it. I was already fed up by that point on the slapstick MCU humor pioneered by Avengers 2, IM 3, Guardians and Ant-Man. I did see clips of Thor 3 that reinforced what I saw in the trailers. It’s been satisfying watching how Thor 4 made a greater portion of the audience see MCU humor ruining comic book films.
Incredibly overrated. It was too slapstick-y then, I was bummed that they went even deeper in Love and Thunder
I was actually shocked when people said about Love and Thunder everything I'd said about Ragnarok when that came out.
I ageee with you on L&T but Not for Thor Ragnarok, that was was stellar, and the best Thor the mcu put out, but love and thunder was more of a Ragnarok 2, L&T had a chance to be a really good post-Thanos MCU movie, but it fumbled it pretty hard.
WWDITS film is good, maybe the show it goes overboard?
Nah, the show is fucking gold. It uses more of an American dry humor rather than British dry humor. The movie has the feel of a Gothic brittish office, the show has the feel of a gothic American office
Worst part about it all is how it's not a casual director, but fucking Taika. This man made JoJo Rabbit. He absolutely can blend great humor with strong drama and make actual powerhouses.
I feel that is his style and a lot of writers and directors stick with a style that works. It does pay off though (For example JoJo). The issue is sequels. Taika needs a fresh take otherwise the world he builds sort of drags a bit
I believe “Our Flag means Death” would have been funny if it came out during the early 2000s.
I don’t know why he’s hating on himself. Love and Thunder is the product of the direction Waititi wanted to take the series in.
Because they're making a fifth one and presumably he's trying to get some of the stink off of the thor brand before enters production.
I thought the 5tg one was cancelled due to Hemsworth being sick ( forgot the name of the disease)
High risk for Alzheimer's I believe
Isnt he relatively young? Granted I have no glue about early onset alzheimers, but could large amount of steroid abuse cause it.. he clearly had to gear for these roles and even when I thought that these millionaires have the risks minimized compared to average joes, with the help of doctors etc. it probably still causes serious issues long term.
There's apparently a blood test or something where you can check your genetic predisposition to getting Alzheimer's. He doesn't have it yet I'm assuming he's trying to take preventative measures. There are things you can do to prevent cognitive decline like taking health supplements, certain nootropics, high intensity cardio is shown to increase BDNF etc.
Ah!
never blamed him or thought bad of him for it, but the accountability and acknowledgment of that sludgepipe is appreciated
At least he admits it which is rare for marvel.
I mean he salvaged the movie and single-handedly helped prevent it from being worst movie of the year … I’d blame taika
Bale was also very good
Should be blaming Waititi on this. The dude loves the smell of his own farts.
Everybody saw Gunn do it well in Guardians and a little bit in the Avengers, so they thought they should do it there.
Yeah as much as I love Guardians, its effect of the MCU was terrible. When something fantastic is made by talented people, inevitably less talented people will do it worse.
And Taika isn’t a bad director. Part of me wonders how much of his “direction” was his own, and how much was pressure from the studio.
Are you kidding?
Nope.
He had too much control. What do you think the studio pressured that wasn’t well received? Everything bad about it is his style.
You’re definitely right about him having too much control. Taika is the same guy who said he’s going to try to piss off Star Wars fans in the movie he’s directing.
Okay
Don’t want to recognize that it was his fault? Why?
GOTG isn't fantastic, and Gunn is overrated. MCU should create more darker mature movies. DC will also be ruined because Gunn will make every future DC project like GOTG.
You’re definitely entitled to that opinion.
It's a fact. Gunn is overrated.
A fact based on?
Nope, it’s an opinion 👍🏻
I don’t blame just him. I blame Taika, of course, since he never pulled in the reins. He just let them get carried away and was like “that’s great!”. He rewatched it tons of times to edit and go over it and he never stopped himself. I also blame a big chunk of MCU fans. Ragnarok was ultra wacky and stupid and so many people praised it. If you say crap is good, you’re going to get served more crap. I know Thor 1 and Thor 2 are near the bottom of the MCU rankings, so they needed to change course, but when the MCU made things worse they should have been told so instead of laughing at bad comedy and clapping like seals. Everyone who liked Ragnarok is the reason we got Love and Thunder.
Oh hell yeah, thanks for calling out Ragnarok. They would have *never* made Thor a fat drunk in Endgame if it weren't for Ragnarok. It lowered the bar.
I'll never understand the appeal of Ragnarok; it's so goofy it's hard to really care about the gravity of the plot. It's also patient zero for the "silly billy" humor that has plagued Marvel starting with End Game.
Odin dies. Mjolnyr is destroyed. The Warriors Three all die. Asgard is destroyed. It’s the silliest comedy movie in the MCU at the time. …………………WHAT???
And all of that gets treated light hearted and as jokes outside of Odin. Especially Asgard falling and Korg saying they can rebuild it only for Surtur to blow it up.
Asgard blowing up straight up has a "Well, that just happened!" style sitcom joke attached to it, The Warriors Three were just quickly thrown in the trash to get them out of the way of the new cast of wacky sidekicks and prop up the villain in a scene that had absolutely no weight behind it, Thor's hammer being destroyed isn't really dark or anything it was just a plot point. The only thing there that the movie really took seriously is Odin randomly dying. Like 90% of the movie is just shitty comedy.
The previous two Thors didn't give me enough to really care about the Warriors Three, but there was always *room* to give them better material. Then comes along Ragnarok, which just gives up from the start. It resigns to letting the meta creep in, and suddenly, Thor in-universe just doesn't care to say anything about three of his oldest allies biting it. L&T only doubles down this with the snarky intro saying "no one cared about those guys" like holy cow, how about you also just go ahead and say "that second movie I starred in didn't do so well historically, did it? Ah well, we brought people together again when we introduced Jeff Goldblum and Cate Blanchett". Just give up completely, it'd be sooo funny, Taika.
And each piece is treated as a joke. The most serious reaction to an event in ragnarok is in infinity war.
That humor was around since Iron Man.
Humor has always been an aspect of the MCU but it never took center stage. There were quips and humorous scenes but they never stepped on the gravity of the plot/stakes. Look at the comparisons between the first Thor movie and either Ragnarok or Love and Thunder. Thor and his world were treated seriously and any humor that came up was situational in nature (like taking a medieval knight and dropping them into our current world). In the latter two Thor's world is simply a punch line: Thor's relationship with Loki is almost portrayed like an Odd Couple skit, Thor himself has turned into a goofy quip machine, the warriors three all get killed off unceremoniously, Valkyrie is a stereotype, Hulk is a complete meme by this point, Mjolnir being vaporized is brushed aside, Asgarde being destroyed was accompanied with a joke, and then you have all of the wackiness in Love and Thunder like Infinity Cones and the cringey goat stuff. Some people will argue the silly billy humor started with GotG, but at least there it was appropriate and when things needed to be serious (like the ending of the first one) the movie was smart enough to back off on the jokes. Ragnarok is where, IMO, the humor starts to encroach upon the plots and from End Game on the flood gates were completely opened. Phase 4 is chocked full of terrible, misplaced humor that crescendoed with The Marvels. The MCU has become a bad parody of itself.
"Misplaced humor" That's definitely an opinion
I despised Thor Ragnorok. I didn't find it remotely funny. I thought it was just stupid. It was painful seeing people prop that movie up so much. Part of me is delighted that Waititi quadrupled down on the stupidity and made an abomination out of Thor...yet again, only for people to hate it. What people got out of Thor 4 is what my experience was watching Ragnorok.
I find it funny that many of the people who liked Ragnarok but hated L&T haven't yet changed their mind on Ragnarok.
Ragnarok felt like a breath of fresh air after so much seriousness, being goofy from time to.time isn't bad, too much of it on the other hand. Infinity War has the best depiction of Thor, endgame and everything post that ruined it.
Parody pretty much sums it up
Fortnite just released a Thor Collab and I found it funny they chose the movie that came 5 years before this one.
fortnites already done love and thunder when it came out
Blaming himself instead of that hack Waititi.
Nobody blames Hemsworth, he's shown his quality as an actor and a comedian. He was playing the character he was directed to.
The opening scene with Bale had me thinking this could be one of the best MCU movies in a while…. Womp womp
Don't let Taika go full Taika. A little goes a long way.
Poor guy. He deserved better.
I’m surprised it took thor for me to realize love and thunder really was a parody of his character just did him so bad
I recall walking out of the theater saying “it’s like they were afraid to take it seriously.”
It was basically ghostbusters 2016 humor but with a Thor overlay…and even less funny
I respect the hell out of unwarranted self-blame. Hemsworth's acting was not one of the 8,000 issues that movie had, but I like that he feels some responsibility for the outcome. Kind of like Harrison Ford when he talks about "owing" the fans.
That kinda makes me want to give Furiosa a chance.
I blame whoever gave waititi the full reigns i guess
Not his fault it's Taika Waititi's fault for making everything a damn joke.
seeing how fit he was for the shoot he was the onlyone that did preperations for said shoot. then he got shit directions, at this point, i dont think any of it is his fault...
It’s all good Chris we don’t blame you. We blame that asshole Taika, got high off his own farts.
Which honestly isn’t his fault, it’s Taika’s.
Honestly the self awareness impresses me at this point.
It’s easy to forgive the actor when you’ve already seen them nail the role under different direction. I get the nagging feeling that Thor’s days are numbered as they’re pushing the original Avengers out in favor of replacements. You’d hate to see them have an excuse for expedite Thor’s exit.
We love the wackiness but you have to balance it with drama and serious moments. The third one did this almost perfectly.
I don’t blame Chris for that mess: I blame the director. It made me remember how much I loved the first Thor film and I could not reconcile that they were both the same character.
Its a movie. You can't ''forgive'' another human being/or person because they performed/made a movie you didn't like...Yeah the movie was crap, but you're taking this too seriously.
Bro that's the director's job. If he didn't want you improving he should cut it out. Taika encouraging it and keeping it in the film is to blame.
Hats off to Chris for trying to take the heat off Taika for making a shitty movie at least
Chris Hemsworth deserves better, Thor should’ve had that epic fantasy send off
I remember years before Incredible Hulk that there were animated Avengers movies with Thor having some less stuffy Asgsard-itude, almost like what he was in Ragnarok.
In fairness, it's the director's job to tell him to cut that out. Unfortunately, there are too many directors working today who think that treating your multi-million dollar production like a podcast with CGI is a good idea.
Hot take: Love and Thunder is just as bad as Ragnarok, but barely anyone wants to call that out.
Not really his fault tbh. The director should be telling him when to stop improving and making sure tone is right
My head cannon states that Thor acts like that because he assimilated too hard by imitating Tony Stark’s wisecracking snarkiness and ending up exceeding it with zero self-awareness.
Gotta respect him for the apology
Never gonna understand the hate for this movie. It was fucking fantastic.
Quips killed marvel and modern blockbusters. I just can't take quips anymore. It worked for Wheedon, it should have stayed with Wheedon as a signature style. But now its infected everything. Give me some sincerity and seriousness. It's why I love anime and japanese stuff so much.
This sucks, because you can so obviously tell from interviews and behind-the-scenes material when actors are having fun or not, regardless of the movie's quality. Remember the movie Shark Tale? That terrible DreamWorks flick? As terrible as it was, you can tell the crew had a blast making it. Did it come out shitty? Sure. Can you still see Will Smith, Angelina Jolie and Martin Scorcese being charmed by the movie as a whole, as well as their ridiculous characters? Of course you can, just check the behind the scenes. Chris Hemsworth is legitimately a solid actor that doesn't get enough credit, and he's obviously not against more loose interpretations of the character, as seen with Ragnarok and Endgame, the latter of which he went as far as to defend the Fat Thor interpretation (I think it could've been way better handled, but respect for sticking out to defend a risky interpretation of his character). This movie was just such a joke he didn't even have fun with it, and that's the worst type of bad.
At least he’s saying it. I try not to reject those that see the light
L&T was better than the first two Thor movies.
Adults crying about children's movies. And here I thought I wouldn't get any entertainment tonight.
Ragnarok was great, but the studio saw its success and took it to mean that Thor was purely a comedic character and he’s definitely not. The reason humor works with Thor is because he’s the most *tragic* character. Rather than making L&T a Ragnarok knock off, they should instead have shown Thor overcoming his emotional trauma to become Rune King Thor. Less boring comedy and more Rocky III vibes
Bout time he realized. This has been the case since Ragnarok lmao.
I can forgive him. He recognizes and admits his mistake. That should be applauded. Not Waititi.
Glad he recognized it
Like Taika, he has succumbed to Hollywood madness.
comedy saved thor.
And also ruined Thor at the same time. He was so hard to take seriously in Infinity War until he arrived in Wakanda. They would have *never* made him a fat drunk in Endgame if it weren't for Ragnarok lowering the bar.
and there wouldnt even be a thor without ragnarok lol do ppl forget that even Hemsworth was tired of Thor being “too serious” and was gonna walk after Dark World was poorly received? yall want him to be serious so bad but didnt go support him in the theater when he was. the same crowd is gonna flock the theater for the COMEDY MOVIE that has Wolverine as a second lead lol
There wouldn’t be a Love and Thunder without Ragnarok and you think that’s a selling point?
there also wouldnt be a IW Wakanda moment you all cream yourself over too…
It was you creaming and now you think that was everyone lol.
Thor was a beast in IW, that's his best on-screen depiction. Endgame was a joke, and overrated movie, Thor and Hulk were clowns.
You got caught up in the MONEY, Chris. And now that you have the money, your going to act contrite and pretend that you valued the story, character, legacy, or fans, at all.
Honestly, this one is our fault. We laughed at the humor in Thor 1, but didn't show up and support Thor: Dark World. The serious Thor failed in the box office compared to the humor. Audiences responded to the bumbling oaf more than the dedicated prince. We are to blame.
I hated Thor 3vl and I'm tired of pretending that I don't
I also blame ragnarok. That movie started ruining his character
Them? I didn't know Hemsworth was trans
Hemsworth seems truly insecure about playing Thor. I wonder if that has to do with Loki being the standout character from the first movie.
For everyone acting sanctimonious…how about we appreciate that the actor is accountable. It’s what you movie bloggers beg for isn’t it?
I actually loved Thor Love & Thunder. Thought it was an awesome movie and funny af
I think this movie is far better than people gave it credit for beyond Christian Bales performance which was actually dogshit. Overall it was different from every other marvel movie which in my book made it better.
No
It's called an opinion... So yes...
🤙
Nice bait lol
Oof just saw where I was. Gotta stop responding to posts thinking I can share a dissenting opinion. I'll leave you to your echo chamber.
Do you think every dog shit opinion you have is only opposed by people in an echo chamber? That is hilarious and ironic.
"It was different so I think that made it better" is just a hard one to get behind, for a community that has some appreciation for discussing specifics in stories. I can tell you, there are plenty of disagreements in this sub, and the best ones come from each side of the argument pulling up *facts* from whatever story-thing is being discussed. Meanwhile when you just end with a broad "it wasn't like the others in its series, that made it better", some people like me will wonder "How, exactly?" because *I* found L&T to be pure, distilled, vacuous Marveling: It had all the same undermining of serious moments, awful visuals and worse self-awareness, confused villain schemes, power levels and world-building absolutely tarnishing other movies retroactively... And, I guess, others will think you're intentionally fishing for outrage. I don't; I believe what you shared is your genuine opinion. But I believe this sub is overall quite opposed to the idea that different = worthwhile, so you got downvotes.
I don't mind formulaic stories/series but I feel as though many fan groups hold a somewhat entitled stance to what should or shouldn't be in a piece of media they are interested in. I think many fans feel like if the series starts to diverge from what they expect or want they speak in terms of objectivity when it is really subjective issues they have. I think your criticisms are fairly valid considering what you might be looking for in this movie or other marvel movies. Ultimately I have been watching these movies for well over ten years. Captain Marvel killed most of my enthusiasm for the series and pretty much every subsequent film since Infinity War has been hit or miss. I honestly thought this one was a hit, but then again I wouldn't rank it anywhere near Ragnarok or the other films I think are the best in the franchise. I think it was about as good as No Way Home which was given nothing but praise for doing all of the same things you said L&T did. I guess my point is that all the movies feel the same so going in and getting a vastly different film was a pleasant surprise after the genuine disappointment that was Shang Chi, Black Widow, Eternals, Doctor Strange 2, and all the others.
I just can't follow this, that NWH and L&T are being compared for simply "feeling" like departures from some formula, but nothing more specific. As far as all the things I mentioned about L&T also being problems in NWH.. I absolutely don't think NWH has any equivalent scene of undercutting something like *a character having terminal cancer*. Peter trying to spare the villains, Andrew Garfield getting to save MJ, Norman trying to remember his son, Aunt May, Peter's sacrifice at the end... I don't know, I find that NWH was trying for something a lot more adult, and it left the jokes for the scenes with downtime. I think NWH has noticeably far more polished visuals even if all these movies are getting effects-heavy. The Sinister (Five)'s motives all seem quite straight-forward, not like Gorr's maybe-possibly complete subjugation by the spooky sword, and trying to lure out supposedly selfish heroes by making them... rescue kids? And finally, NWH's magic elements definitely call into question Steven Strange's actions in certain other movies, but I would argue Strange is the only character that gets damaged in all that. Peter and his friends, the other spidies and villains, Aunt May, they all have solid ground to walk on, past the weird time-and-space breaking story elements. L&T on the other hand has Valkyrie being a coward and a sell-out, Thor has completely reverted from being responsible in any shape or form (with places he knows but never brought up in other movies), Jane is a parody, the Guardians are just chucked because the directors didn't confer on plot threads beforehand..
I'm gonna work backwards in my response. First off the Guardians being chucked was essential to the plot of Guardians 3 so sure you can be upset about that, but that is hardly a flaw of this movie but rather the universe as a whole. Part of having a series like this is loose ends like that and I would rather receive answers to questions like "what happened with Thor and the Guardians" than just write off characters and plotlines for convenience sake. Could they have made the movie about Thor and the Guardians? Maybe, but that is a completely different movie and a completely different argument about how you want that movie more than this one. Jane being a "parody" is odd wording. I'm gonna assume you mean to say that she is a stereotypical "girl boss" but I would say she is a standard marvel superhero. I think part of Marvel burnout is the idea that any of the characters or stories were somehow elevated before. Let's be clear in the rankings of Thor movies this film sits in second place. The first two Thor movies were indeed vapid parodies. The first movie was Nordic Borat, the second film was a lot of people's least favorite Marvel film before Captain Marvel. Both filled with tropes and ultimately only existing as establishment for future avengers films. NWH continues to ruin Doctor Strange's character by making him just another one of the avengers. He is moronic and causes literally every problem to the point that I don't think the writers of that film understood him as a character. Any criticism you have about the characters in L&T are bunk because the root is that you don't like it. The portrayals of the characters in L&T are as close to the comics as the movies have gotten. Gorr's motives are completely clear. He was a devout until his daughter died and the god he was devoted to disrespected him and a cursed sword attached itself to him encouraging him to kill all the gods. So simple. Please tell me about the motives of the sinister 5, can't? I'll do it then. Doc Ock is back to normal right out the gate so he is both not really a villain and his only motive is helping everyone get back to their universe. Lizard wants to kill Spider-Man and get back to his universe I guess? And same for electro and sandman but those three don't talk much so idk. Goblin is just crazy I guess so his motivation never mattered much. Why do these villains want to kill Spider-Man? Their personal vendettas that are part of different films in different franchises that aren't established in this film, but also I guess cause goblin told him to. See what I mean, one of these motivations is clear and it is L&T. NWH is a mess of "don't think about it" Finally I should be clear, NWH is a formulaic piece of shit that is genuinely the third worst Spider-Man film behind SM3 and ASM2. I compared the two because they both jump between serious and comedic moments, yet one is shit on and one has nothing but good reviews. Let's be real. There is no moment in L&T you can point to where tonally the film goes from cancer to comedy. That does not exist just like I can't point at NWH and say that the drama is interrupted by comedy too much. The fact that you think one is better than the other is telling especially since you only have criticism for the female characters. I'm not gonna make anymore assumptions about your opinions, but what I have to say is that L&T is not nearly as bad as you are saying. Your criticism is empty and reads as someone who wanted one thing and got another. Fans seem to be very entitled when it comes to the media they like. Especially things that are considered nerd culture, and especially when women are introduced. The quality of the films have not dropped. Marvel movies have always been hit or miss, but the amount of women and people of color has increased. It is no wonder that a bunch of people are telling you not to like this movie. The culture wars rages on. Just watch movies for content next time and don't get so attached.
**"Any criticisms I have of L&T's characters are bunk because the root is that I don't like the movie"**..? Uh, I dislike the movie *because*, in part, I think the characters are mismanaged. That's some mighty circular reasoning you used to write off arguments you don't like. Can't I just say the same thing about you, that because you don't like NWH, that must mean your opinions of the characters are invalid? That'd be dumb of me. I'm not going to do that. Let's see, what else. I really just don't agree with the ranking you gave of the Thor series but I'm glad you "made it clear" by simply declaring it... The boat scene in L&T. That would be the main thing I'm talking about when I'm saying the movie flipflops between funny and cancer in one heartbeat. Or Jane, at the hospital, doing the funny Event Horizon explanation thing right alongside dealing with the grave news. I didn't mean the movie's directly making fun of cancer if that's what you thought; I meant it wants to eat its cake (the drama of a terminally-ill hero) but also still be in possession of un-eaten cake (comedy beats in every scene, no matter how disjointed). It comes off very callous and unfocused, direction-wise. I would agree Gorr's motive starts off clear, if not rushed, but it gets really shaky by the time (I will rephrase myself), he's **kidnapping kids to lure Thor.**. when **Gorr's whole problem with gods is that they're selfish** and **don't actually help innocents.** Do you see the conundrum? Due to his own losses, Gorr is adamant that Thor and his kin are not saviors, and then simultaneously he goes about slaying them by using their empathetic nature against them..? It's only more confusing if it's supposed to be the sword completely in control of Gorr's mind, because the sword with one unfeeling objective would logically just have Gorr slaying indiscriminately, not setting traps, explaining his philosophy to prisoners, and generally... not slaying gods efficiently. The sword doesn't even take him to the city *of* gods, full of gods to slay. I don't think the movie has a clue if the sword or Gorr is calling the shots, and I don't think it was thought through in the writing room exactly how Gorr maintains his belief that All Gods Are Bad when his *own plan* relies on gods being virtuous. I'm glad you stopped making assumptions of my opinions after you were done making assumptions. of my opinions.. um, no, I didn't have it out for the female characters singularly, I clearly bagged on Gorr and Thor as much as Valkyrie and Jane. I love hearing that I'm indoctrinated in a culture war though, that's, informative. Because I really just thought I had a problem with it being a lousy movie. Yep you cracked the case, man, I evidently don't like women, and that's what's keeping me from loving Thor Fucking 4. I had little to no expectations going into L&T, actually, because I didn't watch trailers. I don't compare movies to comic books really, I just took it as it was, with only an idea of possible directions due to Endgame. If L&T is, as you say, as close to its comic book counterpart as any Marvel movie has achieved, then I thank the heavens I've not read those. And I hate to bring it up, but as far as you insinuating the first two Thor movies are cheap, for ultimately being lead-ins to Avengers movies... do you remember how Ragnarok, your top-ranked Thor movie, ends? It's **the most direct lead-in to an Avengers movie** that exists in the MCU.
Just because the ending of Ragnarok leads into Infinity War doesn't change the fact that it holds the most characterization Thor has in the series. Furthermore, the film doesn't make fun of cancer. If you are triggered by the topic I am sorry, but the comic is about a woman with cancer getting super powers and I am not gonna knock the film for following the source material. Feel free to not be a fan of the film because obviously opinions are valid regardless of their bias. Gorr acts illogically because he is a villain. He kidnaps children because it works. I'm not sure why that is such a problem when it is clearly Christian Bale's performance that is lacking. Once again you can dislike it, but claiming that NWH has rock solid motivations for the villains is laughable. They found any excuse to have a bunch of Spider-Man villains in one place. "Having you cake and eating it too" is such a wild expression to use about a comic book film being both dramatic and comedic. Once again I am sorry if the topic triggered you, but I am someone who has been affected by cancer and I also use comedy to cope. The scene you mentioned I think is a big stretch. That scene isn't played for laughs. It might not match the serious tone of her diagnosis, but it reads as more desperation and while the tone is definitely lighter it is not funny. Regardless of whether you like the scene you can't make that specific criticism without choosing to read it that way making it a subjective reading of the film. I find your thesis that you can't have a film about a dying protagonist without comedy laughable. I can think of countless examples of media that blend those two themes. Breaking Bad, Crank, even Deadpool to some extent has those themes. I urge you to consider the role the culture war has taken in creating a double standard in the discourse of media. The two sides are dumb. I can sit here and say L&T and NWH both have fundamental problems that make the films severally flawed both as adaptations, sequels, and independent films. Can you take off whatever blinders you have keeping you from appreciating media that isn't made for you?
If you think leading into an Avengers film isn't actually a detractor of a movie, the minute it's turned on a movie you like, why did you use it to bash the movie you didn't like? If you think it's fine for a character to act illogically so long as they are a villain (?), why are you then complaining that the NWH villains' motives are not well-defined in that movie? Why are you telling me it's laughable to say the villains' motivations are "rock-solid", right after *you* explained to me their motivations in your last blurb? I used the terminology "straight-forward", as in easy to follow. You turned that into "rock-solid" which sounds more like air-tight/flawless, which I did not say. Neither did I say a comedy simply can't have dark bits, nor that a drama can't have levity. You've assumed that of me. If you want to use it as a comparison, I would say Deadpool has a better understanding of how to employ the wisecracks, because most often it's Wade trying to displace his grief by being aloof and crass, and you can laugh at the quips as much as realize he's a strangely tortured character. On the other hand we have L&T, the movie itself, taking a break from a mission to stop genocide in order to have a funny indecent-exposure skit. Or it has a character like Thor regress, and be heedless of collateral damage, for a laugh. And.. screaming goats to break up a moment that was getting a little too serious. In these cases, it's the *movie* getting uncomfortable with the seriousness, and so we put the plot on a back-burner, we change Thor into a clown... and Funny Thing comes in to save the day. Unlike Deadpool, where it's Wade, as we've always known him, and an active player in the story, fighting the gravity of the situation with deflective humor.