Wright said:
It was a decent movie, and for a change, I could stomach the entirety of a Thor movie. This being said, it was massively disappointing. I take it that I'm not the kind of public these movies are aimed for because everyone else seemed extremely pleased with this movie's progression, but I swear it all feels like a massively wasted opportunity.
Let me tell you my first and big complain: no one seems to like introspection in these movies. Seems everyone wants to copy the Guardians of the Galaxy model nowadays of adding dumb humor even when it's not needed, but unlike Guardians 2, which managed to know when to stop and allow levity to take place, Thor 3 is all over the place. It was one cheap joke after another to ruin everything. Is it too much to ask for a damn interjection at times without dumb shit in the middle? I'm honestly surprised at how incredibly deep some sequences can get (Thor recalling the words of his father and invoking the thunder without his hammer? Fucking yes please), but with each one of these you have to sit through childish, mindless crap. And while I get that superhero movies are also aimed at children, this particular movie has a few dark sequences that don't mesh all that great because it manages to alienate the small kids who might not be able to comprehend them, and the adults who would rather have a grounded experience like that without all the other issues. (Asgard - the city - just got obliterated LET'S MAKE A JOKE ABOUT THAT HAHA)
My second and big complain: everyone in this movie is incredibly braindead. This might have some sense in Guardians of the Galaxy, but it doesn't here. Thor is an idiot, Banner is an idiot, Loki is an idiot; you name him, he's probably an idiot. Don't you love when Banner makes a point of saying if he becomes Hulk again there's a chance he won't revert ever back, but then ten minutes later he does anyway with absolutely zero doubt in his semblance? Not only that, but how incredibly stupid was Banner throughout this whole movie? How come Loki can be so absolutely retarded as to try to betray Thor and five minutes later come in full help? Why does Hela allow Loki to run to the tower and invoke Ragnarok? I swear the characters in this movie are so damn inconsistent there's simply no point in bothering saying why they are, since the movie spells it out over and over.
On a more positive light, I was pleasantly surprised as how the events of Thor Ragnarok basically led to Thor becoming one-eyed Captain Kirk of the Asgard Entership. It was a fun take, alongside the defeat of Hela by basically causing Asgard's destruction at the hands of Ragnarok, that was original too.
|
(First things first, I'm assuming anyone who read this far into the thread is okay with spoilers.)
Banner is a conflicted character. I don't think there has been any inconsistency with that. He doesn't like losing himself to the Hulk, but when push comes to shove and there is 0 chance of saving people from a life and death situation without becoming the Hulk, he willingly gives himself over to it. Yes, when it's just something to talk about, he naturally says I never want to do that again/go through that again. But, when it's on the line, he does what he knows deep down he has to for the good of everybody else and makes that sacrifice. I don't find that inconsistent. It's human to say one thing outside of a crisis, and then heroic to do the opposite inside of a crisis. Yes, after losing 2 years of his life to the Hulk, he feared that becoming the Hulk again might be permanent. Faced with the alternative of watching the entire population of Asgard massacred right in front of him while he sits and does nothing all the while knowing that it is within his power to help, that would be way more out of character by far. It's like asking a fire fighter why they run inside of a burning building when they know they might not make it back out.
As for Hella allowing Loki to run to the tower and invoke Ragnarok, wasn't she focused on fighting Thor and Valkyrie at that point?
Anyway, I loved the movie. I laughed a lot, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Some of the jokes in Guardians of the Galaxy 2 felt very forced. I don't think this movie suffered from that at all. With regard to the complaints about the moment of levity after the destruction of Asgard, they had already hammered home the concept that everyone understood that Asgard was not a place, it's a people. The city was just a material possession that could be replaced. The truly important thing, the population, was saved and would live on. It wasn't an Alderaan situation where all of the people perished. You are aware that there are people who intentionally crack wise to break the tension of a tense or sad situation? I for one didn't mind the comic relief of Korg's character at all. He has a very dry sense of humor, that I have been accused of on many occassions, so that type of comedy goes over very well with me.
I saw the movie on opening day with my wife and my uncle and we all loved it. I think the overwhelmingly positive reviews are well deserved. The criticisms I've seen either feel like nit-picking for the sake of nit-picking. Or people who were looking for a serious movie when this was never advertised as such. It's not like they dropped a dead serious trailer to hook a certain group of movie goers in, then finish filming only to realize that the movie didn't remotely resemble the tone of the trailer, resulting in last minute reshoots to add seriousness in here and there, and then drop a horribly edited mess into theaters.
