|
| ||||||
Reply Subj: I hath seen it, by Odin's beard! Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 at 04:37:40 am EDT (Viewed 9 times) | |||||||
Quote: THE SPOILER-FREE BIT:Quote: The kids and I caught Thor 3D at the weekend. This is the first 3D movie I've seen at a cinema and I found the process somewhat distracting from my enjoyment of the movie. In some places it worked well, but for the main part it interfered with my engagement with the actual story. I'd have been much happier with Thor 2D.It didn't bother me so much, but I agree there were only a few scenes where it really seemed to be worth it. Mostly in Asgard. Quote: 3D aside, I had fun watching the movie. It was a great blockbuster and an enjoyable way to spend some time. It may be attacked as something of a mish-mash, with some loose plot ends and pacing flaws, and these are fair criticisms, but even if the sum of the parts didn't exceed the whole there were some pretty damn good parts in there. It's a worthy piece to rank alongside the Iron Man movies.I think it was a unique take on the Thor mythos - and successfully managed to combine the magical with the superhero genre. I was pleasantly surprised at just how much airtime Asgard got compared to Thor-on-Earth time. Quote: I actually felt Thor was about ten minutes too short, with a few of the combat/action scenes needing another act each to ramp up the threat an extra notch and to give Jane Foster a reason for being in the movie.Some of the combat fell flat, and agreed about JF - but I thought that may have just been a Natalie Portman thing. She never really does it for me (I still haven't seen Black Swan). Quote: Let's look at the detail, with some middling spoilers from here on...SPOILER ALERT!! Quote: The good: Quote: Brannagh doesn't shy away from delivering the Lee/Kirby Asgard. It's a shiny Kirby realm eternal that looks spectacular. The main characters all look pretty good (Volstagg is a bit thin) and most are dressed in their Kirby or Simonson outfits. Even Thor's much-depreciated leather outfit manages to catch the intention of the original costume and works pretty well on screen.I was surprised at how cool/not lame they all looked. Given how some superheroes turn out onscreen. I thought Sif seemed a bit uncomfortable with that shield she was running around with - and unsure exactly what to do with it (her staff on the other hand was awesome). Asgard was spectacular! And very Kirbyesque. Quote: The hammer makes wonderful metallic noises when it whomps things.Quote: There's a reasonable trade-off between Asgardian Shakespeare-speak and modern English. When the Asgardians get cross they tend to speak more "olde-worlde".Quote: SHIELD is presented quite ambiguously, with a meaty role for Agent Coulson. Special Agent Barton was a very pleasant surprise and his personality seemed spot on.Quote: Sif, Fandral, Hogun, and Volstagg are all well portrayed and each has a strong role in the first half of the movie. And there's a great line where a SHIELD observer warns that "Xena, Robin Hood, and Jackie Chan have just arrived". The initial mission featuring these four, Thor, and Loki does a great job of defining each of them.That line was a classic!! Those four were all pretty good. I also liked the interpretation of Heimdall. Quote: Thor himself has a genuine story arc as he goes from being Flash Thompson to becoming a true hero. The moment where he finds he's not worthy to lift Mjolnir is a great dramatic turn and beautifully sets up the payoff where he can heft the hammer. The actor managed to carry off the quiet scenes as well as the heroic ones, demonstrating a real range.I was pleasantly impressed by Hemsworth as Thor. The one thing that irked me about the look (and it's such a minor irk) was his obviously dyed eyebrows. That just looked funny. Quote: The "map" of the Nine Realms is very well done.Indeed. Quote: The post-credits sequence offers a direct lead-in to the Avengers movie, reveals that Loki might be behind the formation of the team, and sets up a potential tie-in from the Captain America movie too. Another "Oh my!" ending.Ooo that's a huge spoiler! but yes, worth hanging around through the closing credits to see it. Quote: The bad:Quote: The movie shies away from baldly admitting that these guys are Norse gods, or that they live in a magical realm. If you want to believe that these are aliens who were mistaken for gods by Vikings and that their power comes from very advanced super-science you can do. It's one area where the script feels like it lost confidence in its ability to draw its audience along; which given it blatantly includes frost giants, the Casket of Ancient Winters etc.seems odd.I thought it was clear enough. The exposition during the introduction. The Erik Selvig character did pick up a book about Norse mythology at the book shop. Jane Foster also made a few comments. No one jumped up and said "wait up - you're saying your Thor? THOR!? Norse god of thunder and what not?" granted. Quote: Balder is on holiday. No sign of him anywhere in this movie.Quote: Jane Foster, a scientist interested in dimensional physics in this version, appears not to have anything other than a default superhero girlfriend personality. All the funny remarks and great play-off expressions go to her female friend. Jane not being a brave compassionate nurse/paramedic robs the character of one of the personality drivers that could explain Thor's attraction to her. And she's pretty much the only main character who doesn't have any contribution to make to solving the threat in the story.Darcy (the friend) makes up for Jane's lack of personality though. I was more concerned that her colleague, Erik Selvig, whom I assumed to be her PhD supervisor, was so lapse in his OHS observations. On reflection though I guess Foster was supposed to be the lead scientist and he was just her assistant. I'm not sure Portman managed to pull that off sufficiently in the movie. Minor quible though. Quote: Sam Jackson didn't seem that excited about his 45-second screentime and seemed to phone in his Nick Fury. The impact of his appearance was lessened because we'd not seen him at all before the post-credits sequence to set him up.Quote: Somewhere in the plot meetings somebody accidentally edited out the bit that explains why Odin needs a snooze and why he might faint suddenly in the middle of a conversation with Loki. The essential two lines of exposition just aren't there.I thought Frigga had one line on it at least? Quote: The indifferent:Quote: It's great that Loki gets more motivation and more development than the average superhero movie villain. However, on a first viewing I was left uncertain about what was going on in Loki's mind at any given time; a natural featrure of Loki, you might say, but when it leaves me puzzled as to why he's doing what he's doing even after the film's ended it's not a good thing. I applaud offering Loki some depth, but I could have used a few more depth markers. Why did Loki decide to commit genocide on the frost giants including his true father?See, I think Loki was awesome! I'd say he was one of the standouts and Tom Hiddleston did a great job in bringing him to life. I think that kind of confusion about why Loki is doing what he is doing is part of him being Loki - though I understand what you are saying above. Quote: The battle scenes were well done but the two big set-piece finale battles both felt too easy for Thor. When you put Thor up against the Destroyer it should require a supreme effort; this was just a tough fight. Thor didn't even rip his cloak. Then the last battle with Loki felt a little anticlimactic. They stand on the rainbow bridge and have a spear and hammer fight with some minor illusion trickery. I didn't feel it served the drama. Meanwhile, the ice giant invasion of Asgard and the bravery of the Warriors Three and Sif in, um, taking Heimdall to hospital, happened entirely offscreen. These fights needed to be better storyboarded with better pacing.Yes, sometimes the battle scenes felt a bit off. The Destroy was visually cool, and there were a few good moments in the fight in the town with it (Sif jumping on it being one) - but there was one stage where the warriors three and Sif were just standing around in the background looking useless I remember thinking looked bad. I did enjoy the Frost Giant world battle though, particularly the chase by the large creature. Quote: So, this movie's a strange beast, flawed by very watchable, different from other superhero fare but sometimes uncertain because of it, strong in many places but lacking in some key battles, excellent in offering character yet occasionally failing to convey motivation. I'd recommend seeing it. I'd watch it again myself. I'd really like to see Thor 2 learn from this start and put all these elements together again with those tiny tweaks to take it from good to great.I agree. I got more from it than I didn't. Visually I think it was stunning. Asgard as said, and Thor flying just looked so dang cool up there on the screen.  | |||||||
