THOR: RAGNAROK

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 895 times.

wushuliu

THOR: RAGNAROK
« on: 6 Nov 2017, 06:21 pm »
This is the flakiest Marvel movie so far. The plot is borderline ridiculous. Blanchett is wasted. Her total villain screen time is probably a half hour and it's a lot of her talking at the camera or fighting.

That said, this movie rocks. It is just plain silly but in a good way. Super fun. Awesome cameos. Just plain hilarious.

I highly recommend seeing this movie, uh, not sober.

Finally, Jeff Goldblum is a God. Greatest casting decision ever made.

poseidonsvoice

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3144
  • Vector - I've got Direction & Magnitude! Oh Yeah!
    • 2 channel/7 channel setup
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #1 on: 6 Nov 2017, 08:11 pm »
This is the flakiest Marvel movie so far. The plot is borderline ridiculous. Blanchett is wasted. Her total villain screen time is probably a half hour and it's a lot of her talking at the camera or fighting.

That said, this movie rocks. It is just plain silly but in a good way. Super fun. Awesome cameos. Just plain hilarious.

I highly recommend seeing this movie, uh, not sober.

Finally, Jeff Goldblum is a God. Greatest casting decision ever made.

Totally agree! I was laughing through many scenes... :green:

Best,
Anand.

Tyson

Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #2 on: 6 Nov 2017, 08:53 pm »
Saw it with my daughter yesterday - agreed it was a blast.  Glad they took the Thor franchise to a lighter place - it was borderline stuffy before this.  Biggest laugh for me: Thor throwing the red ball thrown against the glass window in Hulk's room.  Oh, that's gotta hurt!

EdRo

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 522
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #3 on: 6 Nov 2017, 10:24 pm »
I liked Thor describing his victory  (easily) over the Hulk in their battle.

Rob Babcock

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 9056
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #4 on: 7 Nov 2017, 06:32 am »
I thought it was brilliant!  It's amazing how deftly Marvel made the pivot away from the bleak bombast of the first two to a silly bombast for Ragnarok.  If I was picking nits I'd say they perhaps went to far with the humor given the very dark and momentous events of the film.  And I'm not thrilled about the condition they left our namesake hero in.  Still it rocked!  Lots of great casting including a Matt Damon cameo that was pretty amusing.  I'll note that after several uneven and mostly unsuccessful attempts Marvel finally has Hulk down pat.

Bendingwave

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 156
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #5 on: 7 Nov 2017, 09:46 am »
Although it was entertaining the MCU do not follow the individual characters true power statistics making the movie disheartening to true die hard marvel fans.


hibuckhobby

Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #6 on: 7 Nov 2017, 04:04 pm »
For the first 30 min or so, I was sitting there wondering why in the world they would do this, but
as it developed, I began enjoying the comedic story line and the obligatory battle scenes were
great fun as well.
Hibuck...

Tyson

Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #7 on: 7 Nov 2017, 04:07 pm »
Although it was entertaining the MCU do not follow the individual characters true power statistics making the movie disheartening to true die hard marvel fans.

What is a "true power statistic"?

Folsom

Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #8 on: 7 Nov 2017, 05:08 pm »
Although it was entertaining the MCU do not follow the individual characters true power statistics making the movie disheartening to true die hard marvel fans.

I know what you mean, sometimes. It's the recasts that are the worst for me however.

See the characters power typically has changes many times in the comics. It's hard to know what they'll use. But sometimes it's VERY clearly not right. In GOTG Drax was crazy weak for example. But I was bothered more by the re-scripting of Ronan's character, and having Lee Pace look lanky as him. Also I hate slow healing Deadpool... all the worst comics are around that, and for the movie it was a bad limitation. I could go on for awhile. But I can say that in general the Avengers characters do a million times better at remaining somewhat true compared to horse shit that is the Xmen (as of late anyway).

 

mcgsxr

Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #9 on: 7 Nov 2017, 07:14 pm »
What is a "true power statistic"?

I believe the idea is that the movies don't always represent the powers of the characters the same way that the comic books did.

As I never read comics, I don't often notice - Guardians of the Galaxy as an example - just a movie to me, so I was not trying to reconcile the represented powers of individual characters against any preconceived notion.

As a Norse mythology fan though, I do know a bit about Thor and a lot about the world from which he originates.  I am not sure if that will color my enjoyment of the 3rd flick.  I enjoyed the first 2 for what they were - movies.  I did not expect 100% alignment with the mythology.

I look forward to the movie!

gene9p

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 305
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #10 on: 7 Nov 2017, 10:05 pm »
I think Marvel no longer employs story writers but sitcom writers. Very funny movie but why they made it at all makes no sense except to rake in some bucks. Take out the comedy and it's one of the worst sci fi /comic book movies ever.It was a fun afternoon on a crappy day and I can recommend it as a comedy film. was that woody Allen in the background on Asgard?. Now this movie makes sense... :lol:

Bendingwave

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 156
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #11 on: 7 Nov 2017, 10:44 pm »
What is a "true power statistic"?

There actual powers and abilities listed in the official marvel universe power and stats hand books, which includes there true history.

For example in the movie Hela is Odins first born daughter/Thors sister.........In the official marvel universe hand guide books Hela is the daughter of LOKI....yes you heard me right the daughter of LOKI.

Like most MCU movies there are just too many character flaws for it to make actual sense for true marvel fans.

In Thor ragnarok there is a BIG inconsistency in there powers but I cant say it without giving out spoilers.
« Last Edit: 8 Nov 2017, 12:50 am by Bendingwave »

md92468

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 202
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #12 on: 7 Nov 2017, 11:48 pm »
There are all kinds of liberties taken with character arcs and powers taken in the book runs themselves, let alone in their film adaptations. Characters routinely became far more powerful with time, for example – not because their powers became more fully developed, but because telling a story over and over about a character who was strong enough to lift a car gets boring after a while.

I grew up during Marvel's silver age, and I'm enjoying watching talented film makers take a crack at the material. I didn't mind at all that Hank Pym wasn't an original Avenger, or that Tony Stark created Ultron (rather than Pym). It made sense in the cinematic arc they had built. Most of the choices they've made have been respectful to the original material, which is all one can reasonably ask for. When they don't respect the material (the sh*t they pulled with Mandarin in IM3, for example, or the butchering of the FF by Fox), it's annoying. But by and large Fiege & Co. have done a great job giving us an approximation of the universe we enjoyed as kids, which is pretty fun to experience now as an adult.

Now if they could just get the FF rights back for phase 4 we'll be golden...
 
« Last Edit: 8 Nov 2017, 01:29 am by md92468 »

EdRo

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 522
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #13 on: 8 Nov 2017, 02:27 am »


I was a bit disappointed with the "Valkyrie" in Ragnarok. I was hoping she would be a favorite character of mine. Rumor had it that a dispute between McFarlane and another author/writer had left the rights to one of my favorite characters in comics, Angela, (from the Spawn franchise) free for Marvel to pick up and use in an upcoming movie. She would be penned in as a long lost sister of Thors. Wasn't to be, I guess.

Folsom

Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #14 on: 8 Nov 2017, 05:29 am »
SOILERS!!!!!!!!!!

Ya the Valkyrie was a disappointment... little imp of a person.

I enjoyed the movie but didn't like a fair bit about it.

First thing, the comedy was nice but sometimes it was just breathing in my face and not necessary. There were times when it was too much like watching a sitcom (like some people have said). That was the worst.

Did anyone notice the huge circular logic that made no sense? Thor kills Surtur, Hela can kill Thor, Surtur kills Hela. Huh?

Another huge confusion... What happened to the Odinforce? Sorry but Thor could never best Odin without the force that became the Thorforce. Odin with it could stop Hela no problem, but somehow Thor who is now stronger than Odin can't do shit? RIGHT... Maybe one reason they are working it this way is to avoid Thor being that powerful when Thanos comes knocking, because Odin can bitch slap Thanos like he's a little polio child.

Heimdall, WTF happened to this guy? In the first two movies he's regal and looks great. Also the only other Asgards as strong as him are Thor and Odin, generally speaking (not including Odinforce). Now he's a bit wimpy, and in a few years grew some nasty looking dreadlocks??????? ????? ? ?

Thor vs. Hulk. Um, short of the Odinforce, Thor loses in anything but the weakest incarnations of Hulk in hand to hand combat. The Hulk can basically laugh off nuclear blasts at the level he's at, a little lightening would mean nothing. Early comics would always put Thor above Hulk, but he later became a force of nature embodying anger. At the Hulk's strongest he was well beyond Thor's hammer.

Bendingwave

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 156
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #15 on: 8 Nov 2017, 05:47 am »
Ya the Valkyrie was a disappointment... little imp of a person.

I enjoyed the movie but didn't like a fair bit about it.

First thing, the comedy was nice but sometimes it was just breathing in my face and not necessary. There were times when it was too much like watching a sitcom (like some people have said). That was the worst.

Did anyone notice the huge circular logic that made no sense? Thor kills Surtur, Hela can kill Thor, Surtur kills Hela. Huh?

Another huge confusion... What happened to the Odinforce? Sorry but Thor could never best Odin without the force that became the Thorforce. Odin with it could stop Hela no problem, but somehow Thor who is now stronger than Odin can't do shit? RIGHT... Maybe one reason they are working it this way is to avoid Thor being that powerful when Thanos comes knocking, because Odin can bitch slap Thanos like he's a little polio child.

Heimdall, WTF happened to this guy? In the first two movies he's regal and looks great. Also the only other Asgards as strong as him are Thor and Odin, generally speaking (not including Odinforce). Now he's a bit wimpy, and in a few years grew some nasty looking dreadlocks??????? ????? ? ?

Thor vs. Hulk. Um, short of the Odinforce, Thor loses in anything but the weakest incarnations of Hulk in hand to hand combat. The Hulk can basically laugh off nuclear blasts at the level he's at, a little lightening would mean nothing. Early comics would always put Thor above Hulk, but he later became a force of nature embodying anger. At the Hulk's strongest he was well beyond Thor's hammer.

Finally someone who understands Marvel as I agree with you.

Yes I did notice that circular logic as I sort of mentioned it in my other post but didnt want to say it due to spoilers.

Rob Babcock

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 9056
Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #16 on: 8 Nov 2017, 10:02 pm »
Although it was entertaining the MCU do not follow the individual characters true power statistics making the movie disheartening to true die hard marvel fans.

True, but even the books are sometimes guilty of that.  Character's powers come and go the plot dictates.  For instance, remember when Mongoon nearly killed Thor who was saved by the intervention of mortal Eric Masterson?  Really Mongoose is around the power level that would make him a Spiderman foe- he should have been defeated with laughable ease by Thor.  Daredevil has bested Spiderman in the books which is a stretch since Spidey is stronger and faster.

Besides, books (comics included) are one kind of art while films are another.  I have kind of come to accept that compromises will be made when moving from one form to another.

Apropos of nothing I think Thor defeats the Hulk 9 out of 10 times, even without the Odinforce.  With the Odinforce...well, he's up in Silver Surfer territory, probably stronger.

Tyson

Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #17 on: 8 Nov 2017, 10:37 pm »
Agreed with Rob - movies and books/comics are simply different.  Things that work in the comics won't work on the screen (and vice versa). 

But the good news is this - if you want something that is 100% true to the comics, you already have it.  The comics themselves are 100% true to themselves and you can just read them any time you want that level of consistency.  With any other medium there's going to be divergence, and sometimes serious amounts of divergence.  Just the nature of things.

Folsom

Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #18 on: 8 Nov 2017, 10:49 pm »
9 out of 10 for ancient Hulk, sure. But he can't hold a candle to WBH. Hulk at his best accidentally exploded a planet, as a repercussion of what he was actually doing, which wasn't trying to bust a planet. That feat is something Thor merely believes he might be able to do with his hammer, as generally speaking it simply just passes through a planet. Hulk has presented stronger feats many times over in more recent years.

While stories do dictate changes in powers, generally speaking they stay pretty consistent for longer story arcs. Dare Devil beating Spiderman wasn't a story told for years, it just happened once.

Furthermore SS is nothing but a whelp compared to Odin. SS and Thanos came at Odin once, SS got slapped out of the fight, and Thanos got beat down. SS was upgraded to maybe Thanos's level, whom cannot take Odin.



I think they need to make formulas for what can and cannot be changed, to help the non-fans working on the projects. There are limits. When you go to far, your movie falls on its own ass and you get cut down at the box office. That already happens... And yet when you pay attention to the comics you can turn a B movie into a huge box office hit (Deadpool).

Tyson

Re: THOR: RAGNAROK
« Reply #19 on: 8 Nov 2017, 11:00 pm »
When you go to far, your movie falls on its own ass and you get cut down at the box office. That already happens... And yet when you pay attention to the comics you can turn a B movie into a huge box office hit (Deadpool).

Superman Returns was a lot closer to the comics than Man of Steel.  Per the above reasoning, SR should do better than MoS at the box office.  Obviously that's not true, MoS crushed SR at the box office. 

Look, things get changed in order to go from a long form story (books/comics) to fit a short form story (movies).  Sometimes it's well done, sometimes its not. 

IMO being well done (or not) has more to do with BO success than faithfulness to the original source.