Review: Thor

Sunday, May 1 by
 

Thor‘ target=’_blank’>Thor-2′ target=’_blank’>Thor was never a comic book I read. I’m not particularly interested in Norse gods or warriors from another planet who come to earth. Thor is Thor movie and it doesn’t do anything to sell me on the mythology.

The film’s only good action sequence is the battle against the Frost Giants on their planet. Thor gets some good hammer whacks in and each of the Warriors Three (Ray Stevenson, Josh Dallas and Tadanobu Asano) and Sif (Jaimie Alexander) get to display various weapons and powers. You might as well do the whole movie on Asgard, but of course then Thor couldn’t joi The Avengers. The rest of the action is just beefy man fights.

The film even struggles to make Earth matter. All Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is doing on Earth is trying to get his hammer back. He goes out drinking with a scientist (Stellan Skarsgard) in a pointless scene, but what does Asgard do for us? Eventually Loki (Tom Hiddleston) unleashes the Destroyer so Thor has to defend us. That’s it? Asgard sends baddies to Earth and Thor fights them?

Natalie Portman Is All Over Thor In New Trailer

I get the arc Thor goes through but it’s still contrived. Oh, the hero learns a lesson. Loki tricks Thor, but he’s no Iago. He just says something that isn’t true. It’s not like he’s incepting Thor. Even though I’ve never read a Thor comic, I knew exactly what would happen when he tried to get his hammer back, and what would happen the second time.

The Asgard parts are like a modern day Clash of the Titans, gods standing around talking about battle but with better production value. They actually get through a lot of plot really quickly in the first act, but that only means they’re making room for more on Earth.

Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) discovers Thor during her physics research. She gets to be a love interest and explain the science of interplanetary travel, via her layman assistant Darcy (Kat Dennings). Coulson (Clark Gregg) is like a stealthy MIB type in this one, so I guess his character changes per movie. SHIELD investigates Thor’s hammer and blah blah blah. The Tony Stark reference is nice though.

They derive some good comedy when earthlings react to Thor-talk. The fish out of water joke gets old when he’s walking through traffic intersections. When Sif and the Warriors show up again they just get downright goofy. And I’m sorry, armor on earth looks silly.

At least Kenneth Branagh knows how to shoot destruction. The film looks good, and steady with no shaky cam. Even when he tilts the camera for establishing shots, the framing is still right. The 3D makes the backgrounds look like flat backdrops even though they’re probably actual graphic designs, but the perspective work is good. They make the frost giants tower over Odin (Anthony Hopkins).

The visual effects look like live-action people shooting through space, ice beasts and weather swirls. So, just like every other CGI movie. Honestly, why spend years on complex computer shots just so we can see the same effect? There is a tag after the credits though so stick around for your Easter egg.

COMMENTS

  1. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Yves

    Interesting review considering the movie has been receiving nearly universal acclaim from everywhere else


  2. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Zombiexbuddha

    Would you say this movie is…Thorrible?


  3. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    American Ritual

    Did you even watch it? You suck.


  4. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    AmericanIdiot

    Loki sent the destroyer to stop the powerless Thor from coming back to Asgard.. Where are you going with the “asgard sends baddies” crap? It was never established that this will be the case in the earth scenes since the destroyer was the only “baddie” sent here.


  5. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Mr. Dave

    Seriously, dude? It’s called IMAGINATION. Films use it sometimes. Not every good film has to be depressing or artsy. Sometimes a film can be, oh I don’t know…fun? Hating on a movie just because they inputted cool CG to create a new immersive world doesn’t make you intelligent or nonconformist, it makes you dull. Thank god the rest of the world doesn’t think the same way.

    You knew what would happen because you recognized the film is modeled after an archetypal hero’s journey story…Good job! The same character construct is in plenty of stories. Why? Because it’s ENJOYABLE TO WATCH. I’m pretty sure people aren’t walking in thinking Thor will spontaneously die halfway through the film. You’re not special, we all recognize the patterns in these types of films. But yet, we love watching it because…it’s FUN! And it’s the JOURNEY that makes it fun, not just the “predictable” end result. There’s some Aristotle for you.

    Of course, if the story is crap and the characters have no depth, that’s another thing, but to judge it simply on the principles you suggested is just unfair. And does the fact that it came from a comic book really make a difference? A story is a story no matter where it came from.

    Alright, I’m done. Just had to get that out there… ;)


  6. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    HAMMER!!!

    Armor does look silly on Earth, that’s why most people in the cinema laughed. Sometimes, it’s good to laugh.


  7. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    HAMMER!!!

    Armor does look silly on Earth, that’s why most people in the cinema laughed. Sometimes, it’s good to laugh.


  8. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Ev_ton

    It just reads like you couldn’t be bothered to watch the film because Thor is as beneath you as a film as it, apparently, was as a comic.

    By all means write a bad review, but justify it and watch the movie first. You say the outfits look silly, well the film says that or were you so busy not watching you missed the Xena, comment? Earth wasn’t that important? We know, it wasn’t meant to be. How it’s like every other movie with CGI in is also something you should explain, because it isn’t.


  9. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Ev_ton

    It just reads like you couldn’t be bothered to watch the film because Thor is as beneath you as a film as it, apparently, was as a comic.

    By all means write a bad review, but justify it and watch the movie first. You say the outfits look silly, well the film says that or were you so busy not watching you missed the Xena, comment? Earth wasn’t that important? We know, it wasn’t meant to be. How it’s like every other movie with CGI in is also something you should explain, because it isn’t.


  10. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Lead_sharp

    That reads like you read the synopsis and made assumptions. I mean I know you didn’t (or at least I’m fairly convinced) but every negative review I’ve read reads like this one, bored, flat and lazy with little reason to dislike the film other than the fact that everyone else seems to get more out of than they do. And for the record, the armour looked great.


  11. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    RealAlias

    Mr. Topel, you just opened up a can of whoop-ass on yourself.

    MARVEL FOREVER, MAN!!!!!


  12. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Grant

    I love how you start out by making an assumption about the film, and at the same time admitting that you know nothing about the creative roots of the film. For example, you start out by saying that you have never read a Thor comic, and that you aren’t interested in Norse mythology, and yet you try and make assumptions about what their goal was when they created a film based on a Thor comic. I feel like you enter your review with so much bias that I really can’t trust your opinion in this matter. It reminds me of people who criticized 300 for not being historically accurate.


  13. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Markous Blastpoised

    Its no coincidence that the people who have had negative reviews didnt care for the character in the first place.


  14. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    jousheenb

    this review is pretty poor,, or is this even a review, i know you want traffic


  15. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Edwin_campos

    Wow, what an thoughtless review. Thank you Dave, and the rest, for putting it so clear to someone who admittedly went in armored up in his own ignorance BEFORE he actually saw the movie. And yet he is supposed to be in a position to give us, the masses, a fair assessment? I can only imagine after the reamming he is sure to get from other readers that will follow, that he will have learned how to at least appear thoughtful in future reviews. I say “appear” because after reading this review I am somehow convinced that he is far too lost in his own thick head, and he will have missed the more valuable point of actually trying to be more open-minded before spewing out further biases and ignorance in the future.


  16. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Sinclair

    This review is just bizarre. It’s actually hard to believe you actually took the time to watch the film, or did you just sit through it instant messaging on your blackberry with your review already written? I accept that this is a lightweight movie and there are no huge surprises, but as a fan of films in general not just action or comic book films I thought the performances by the cast were outstanding. And honestly, the use of the term “incepting” – would you have even thought of using this if it hadn’t been for Inception? Based on the formulaic negativity of this review I sincerely doubt it.


  17. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Henry

    Well i think everyone is entitled to their opinion,that said i dont share yours at all.
    You seem to think that because u can predict what happends in a movie either it sucks or u are a genius,dont make me laugh…please,someone already commented on the archetypical heroes journey and i have news for you it doesnt stop there,all genres are actually very predictable,much more in movies,that doesnt mean all movies are good,but the genres follow formulas because its what people like to see they teach u that first fay at film school,dont tell me u dont know what to expect from a romantic comedy or an action movie,horror movies etc etc.

    I think your problem is you dont like the superheroe movie genre,because Thor was a great superheroe movie,the fans and public in general are speaking,just check your fellow reviewers

    About the cgi i dont see the problem with it,it was good cgi,what was your point with that,is a movie about the god of thunder,did you spect the actors to actually travel to Asgard the city of the gods,Chris hemsworth to fly for real…dont be ridiculous dude its a movie,and the kind of story that require cgi and other special effects wich were very well done.

    I think you could give a bad review to a porn movie just because there is sex in it and it is just too predictable for you lol


  18. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Michael

    Wow. I wouldn’t want to associate with this joyless fop. I wonder if he ever saw a movie that he did like. Ya know, bub, it ain’t a Shakespearian tragedy … it’s a comic book movie, based (believe it or not) on a COMIC BOOK and not on the Poetic Edda of Codex Regius. Come down off your high horse and try to have some fun.


  19. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Sam F.

    Congratulations! This is probably the sloppiest review that I’ve ever laid eyes upon. Your entire review could be summed up with: “I don’t like Norse mythology and I never read Thor. I don’t know why I saw this movie in the first place as I’m clearly not in the target audience.”


  20. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Jay

    “And I’m sorry, armor on earth looks silly.”

    I thought it was an entertaining movie. It was shot pretty well and you really can’t expect costumes from another realm to fit in with Earth. Just like wearing a hoodie and skinny jeans in Asgard may look out of place.

    You missed out the performances by Hemsworth and Hopkins which were pretty strong and Dennings was a quirky bright spot.

    I agree the visual effects were good and I’m sick of ‘shaky cam’ action.

    It is what is it, an entertaining, comic book movie that stays mostly true to it’s roots. If you were looking for anything different, then you went to the wrong movie.

    I thought the CGI was pretty well done, it contained some of the best 3D fight sequences to date.

    For a tale that spans 2 realms and has fantastical elements intermingled with earthly ones, I think Branagh pulled it off very well.


  21. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Jacob Wongwai

    I would have to agree with most of the people. You actually sound like a royal a**hole writing this review. You seriously said that you know nothing about Thor and then start making assumptions. I have read some of the comics and a lot of Norse Mythology and this movie did a good job on picking ideas from them. I could not read the rest of the review because i could not stop laughing at the stupidity of your review lol.


  22. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    C.T.

    Just so I’m clear on things. Thor was too predictable, but Cats and Dogs 2 and The Last Airbender weren’t predictable. Thor wearing armour was silly, but talking cats and dogs, or characters able to control the elements aren’t silly. Does that about sum it up? If one of the criteria that distinguishes between those who are Top RT Critics, and those who are of the ‘run of the mill’ variety is consistency….then it’s really not hard to see why you are in the latter category.


  23. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Blammer

    Here’s a somewhat critical yet objective review that may change your mind about “every negative review…” There are reviewers who love the genre, love Thor yet find fault. Love to hear your thoughts.
    http://www.dailyblam.com/news/2011/05/02/jeromys-movie-review-thor


  24. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Goran

    I agree with all your opinions concerning Thor. However, thanks to the performances from the actors (first of all Anthony Hopkins’ imposing Odin), my impression of the movie weighted towards a more positive impression… Which leads me to ask you: are technical details all you’re paying attention to? :)


  25. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Goran

    I agree with all your opinions concerning Thor. However, thanks to the performances from the actors (first of all Anthony Hopkins’ imposing Odin), my impression of the movie weighted towards a more positive impression… Which leads me to ask you: are technical details all you’re paying attention to? :)


  26. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Goran

    I agree with all your opinions concerning Thor. However, thanks to the performances from the actors (first of all Anthony Hopkins’ imposing Odin), my impression of the movie weighted towards a more positive impression… Which leads me to ask you: are technical details all you’re paying attention to? :)


  27. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Goran

    I agree with all your opinions concerning Thor. However, thanks to the performances from the actors (first of all Anthony Hopkins’ imposing Odin), my impression of the movie weighted towards a more positive impression… Which leads me to ask you: are technical details all you’re paying attention to? :)


  28. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Chad Pennell

    You’re correct, Thor is a Thor movie.


  29. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Iorek

    it just shows that you belong to those group of people who just simply sucks!


  30. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Anonymous

    Finally (48 hours) time limit to buy.

    LV Muffler     $ 5.99
    LV Bags        $ 19.9
    LV Wallet      $ 6.55
    Armani Glasses $ 5.99
    LV Belt        $ 6.9

    Buy addresses-
    —  tntn.us
    Tips (48 hours after the special product is invalid)
     
     

    /’/…/…./…../ˉ
    ……..(‘(…′…′….ˉ~ /’)
    ……………………..’../
    ………………………./
    ……………………..(
    …….


  31. May 1, 2011 9:05 am

    Gregroshon

    I found this to be a great start to what may become a trilogy, or on the the avengers, felt like a lead up more than a feature film, I liked it, loved the Norse tie in. There was a video game, called Too Human, that has all of the elements. Just not the same story, however visual effects are very close, looks like that could  have been taken directly from it even!!