|Page 11 of 69:||               |
|Index||690 reviews in total|
I just watched 'Thor', to get ready for 'Thor: The Dark World'. I had
heard many good things about it, so I decided to give it to shot at
being good. I have to say, it very much surprised me...
How was the acting?
The acting in 'Thor' was good. By that I mean everyone portrayed their character and played their part above average. The best of the acting was Natalie Portman. She definitely did the best. She played Jane Foster and just killed it. Chris Hemsworth as Thor was a good choice. He portrayed Thor very well. Tom Hiddleston did just about as well as Natalie Portman playing the main antagonist: Loki. Anthony Hopkins did fine as Odin. There wasn't necessarily anything bad or good about his acting.
How was the writing?
It's hard to critique the screenplay for this type of film. I did like how the story went, though. It did have many predictable elements, but some things surprised me. This film did have a bit too many slow parts and the romance between Thor and Jane Fisher just decides to happen, but the things that bugged me the worst weren't those things. It was how there were many illogical, unrealistic, or unexplained things in this film. All of which took me right out of it. Also, the frost giants were way too easy to kill. Those things are twice the size of what the people of Asgard are, and are still killed with one small cut of a sword across their chest. It turns out, the writing was not very good.
Did it have an interesting premise?
I did like the premise and get the humor of what Thor is going through on Earth. Yes, the premise overall was interesting, despite my few flaws with it that I described in the writing section of the review.
Was it entertaining or boring?
Like I said earlier in my review, the film did have a few too many slow parts, making the film kind of boring. Although, the situations at hand during 'Thor' did bring some light into the shadows. The film was entertaining overall, but nothing special happens, and there are only about two scenes that I found exciting. Most of the film was enjoyable, but not entertaining as it should have been, in my opinion.
What things in particular did I like (that I haven't already covered)?
I really liked all of the beautiful scenery, CGI, and effects in 'Thor'. I also liked the direction the film went in story-wise. There were also some pretty entertaining action sequences, too.
What things in particular did I dislike (that I haven't already covered)?
I have already covered most of the things that I disliked about the film, but I have one more. I thought that some of the action sequences were not exciting, a very small number that even that entertaining. There was also one in particular of which I predicted almost everything that happened, and I really did not enjoy it.
How was the film overall?
Despite all of my many flaws with 'Thor', it was mostly entertaining, and had a couple of exiting parts. I say 'Thor' would be good if you don't watch it seriously. That means don't sit down and try to enjoy it. Watch it with a few friends. Text during it. Doing these things could make the film enjoyable. I would give 'Thor' a C- on the grading rating scale.
Do I recommend this film?
As I just explained, I only recommend this film if you didn't try to sit down and enjoy it. If you tried to do that, it wouldn't be very good. If you try to have some fun with it, and watch it with some friends, talk during it, or text during it, 'Thor' could be good.
Will I buy this film?
No, I will not buy this film. If I can't just sit down and watch this film seriously for it to be good, it's definitely not worthy of me buying it.
Sometime movies that I think I'm going to hate surprise.
This film WORKS for me
The love interest between a demi God and a human seem too hard to pull off but was achieved.
The SFX was amazing
The moral message was simple and enjoyable
No strong individual performances besides Hopkins
I like Portman as a carefree soul unlike her character in real life which is full of activism and brain draining causes.
Worked well in surround sound, I had a nice evening
'Thor' follows its eponymous protagonist, the Norse god of thunder,
banished to Earth to learn humility, as his brash and arrogant
attitudes provoke a war. Meanwhile, his brother Loki takes his chance
to seize the Asgardian throne.
Part of Marvel's attempt to create a cinematic superhero universe (the Avengers franchise), 'Thor' stands apart as the most outworldly of the bunch despite its basic banishment and redemption plot. I did not know much of the superhero beforehand, but I know a lot of Norse mythology and I felt Marvel's attempt to recreate it within a real world to be very good. The visuals of Asgard (and Jotunheim) are stunning and truly worthy of gods, whereas the effects involved in the Bifrost scenes are also wonderful.
Kenneth Branagh, mostly known for his Shakespeare adaptations ('Henry V', 'Hamlet'), is quite an odd directorial choice. He brings a distinct Shakespearean feeling to this film: the Asgardian world has a distinct medieval structure, with Odin (Anthony Hopkins) in special evoking quite a lot the kings of old. Many other developments within the film reminds of 'King Lear', 'Henry V' and other Shakespeare's works, plus a very old-fashioned dialogue.
The cast is partially good. Anthony Hopkins, as Odin, is capable of transmitting the regal wisdom and imperative power of his character. Chris Hemsworth is well cast as Thor as far as looks are concerned, and manages to convey well the god's personality. Tom Hiddleston shines as Loki, a delightfully machiavellian villain, and gives quite a powerful performance as the film's most complex character (surprisingly so for a superhero film). The other Asgardian characters, in special Heimdall (a controversial Idris Elba), are also very good.
On the other hand, the film faces quite a bit of problem with the Earth setting. Not only is this part of the film very dull when compared to the Asgard one, the redemption part of the story is quite rushed with Thor somehow relearning his values far too fast to be believable. The rather weak performances from the human cast (Natalie Portman in particular is very bad, but Stellan Skarsgard and Kat Dennings don't shine either) only makes the situation worse. There are some tries at humor, which doesn't work always, and some rather good action sequences.
The film is mostly successful thanks to the stunning Asgard portion of the story (8/10), but it suffers from the rather poor earthly development (5/10). Overall, still quite a fun superhero film.
The movie adaption of Marvel's superhero story Thor is a decent one with the common superhero movie themes. It is a bit shame since some of the characters could have easily been far more interesting, especially Loki. The lack of depth in characters is the biggest flaw of the film. I ended up wondering whether the writers and the actors knew what kind character they are playing or not since there was obviously some themes lingering around that made the film to feel a bit more unique than average. Also some of the sceneries are awesome and very well made and they turn out to be the most impressive thing in this a bit over the average super hero movie. It was amusing superhero movie to watch and made a difference between other superhero movies. Unfortunately sharpening the characters and adding more depth into the plain good versus bad, the hero versus the villain could have made this a remarkable movie.
This movie is less a saga than a facile riddle scrawled by a child's
crayon across the dignity of ancient cultures. Its most redeeming
feature is that it raises the credibility and watch-worthiness of such
gods-and-humans flicks a "Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief." The
humans, including Natalie Portman, who is capable of SO much better
work, were meek and unconvincing even when shrieking, or proclaiming
their commitment to saving each other (or the planet). There was more
real emotion in Anthony Hopkins' single tear than in the remaining
99.8% of the movie.
That said, this film is eye candy of the most obvious sort and it gets its points for prettiness. The Rainbow Bridge mechanism verges on Steampunk, a plus in my book. Good gods live in golden halls (and have blond hair), while bad monsters live in bleak, dark worlds and have gray/black skin (or dark hair). It's symbolism with a sledgehammer here, folks, and surprisingly lacking in subtlety for a director like Kenneth Branagh.
Branagh's credit helps explain the mishmash of Shakespearean and Greek tropes imperfectly overlaid on the Norse mythology, like melted milk chocolate drizzled on a grilled trout.
Yeah - not worth watching unless you really, truly, have nothing better to do.
Thor is a brilliant movie with a great storyline and a very talented
cast that all suit their characters perfectly.It isn't Marvel's
greatest work,but I found it nowhere near disappointing,Chris Hemsworth
was the perfect choice for Thor,and I also really liked Natalie
Portman,a very attractive and talented actress,and Tom Hiddleston
performance as Loki is very inspired.I really liked the references to
other Marvel character references,especially the scene where Agent
Coulson is asked if a machine was 'one of Stark's guys' and he replies
that Tony Stark never tells him anything,and I also liked Stan Lee and
Samuel L Jackson's cameo.Thor is a must see for all Marvel fans.
After causing a war on his planet Asgard,Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is sent away by his powerful father Odin (Anthony Hopkins).His brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) takes over the throne Thor was meant to have,only to go mad with his power and go against his family and friends.
3D Blu-Review... Marvel has given us a plethora of great entertainment
the last few years leading up to the "The Avengers" last summer, part
of that was introducing us to Thor and Captain America: The First
Avenger the year before that. Both movies are available in 3-D, and the
films actually both good as far as movies go, differ in the 3-D arena
drastically. Thor tells us the story of the Norse god himself, living
in Asgard, a beautiful world ran by Thor's (Chris Hemsworth) father,
King Odin (Anthony Hopkins), and protected by Thor, his friends, and
Thor's brother, Loki (Tom Hiddleston). After a break in to the kingdom
by what appears to be their old foes the Frost Giants, Thor and his
entourage seek revenge for the invasion. Odin thwarts war just in time,
and in turn banishes Thor to Earth, hoping he may learn a thing or two
about becoming a King, and earn his rightful place on the throne. In
the meantime Loki seems to be responsible for the events and is
stirring up trouble behind the scenes, leading to Odin falling into a
coma, and Loki taking the throne of Asgard.
On Earth Thor keeps running into a few scientists, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård), and Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings) who were chasing a storm that seemed to include Thor inside. Thor's friends start to smell something foul and question Loki, and try to find their friend on Earth. The climax ramps up and the action is well paced. Director Kenneth Branagh does good with the "Aquaman" of the Marvel Universe. I never felt Thor needed his own film, but it works.
What doesn't work so well in this film is the 3-D. It is very difficult to make out anything in any of the darker scenes. Some scenes work, but for the most part the 3-D presentation is lackluster at best. The 2-D version of the film is fine, but unfortunately I cannot recommend this movie in 3-D, a first for me.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
It was really a bad movie. Sorry Thor fans. I personally never been a
fan of these fake god characters. Humans with superpowers who believe
they are gods. Never made sense since I was a little kid.
Perhaps I don't like it, because of the effect of deep and well executed stories of movies like Drive and Europa Report, everything on THOR felt like shallow, superficial and boring...
There are 3 worlds in total, one little town in earth, one world of the ice dudes and Asgard (or whatever) - Most of the movie took place in a little (I mean really little) town in USA (perhaps nothing but a movie set). You can see it's ending on high altitude shots and population was perhaps 100 people? Dialogs are meaningless, character interactions are superficial (an ordinary girl of earth fell in love with a handsome "god" wow!) story is extremely simple. I'm taking that much simple stories as an insult to my intellect. I think the people hated from Prometheus are probably people who loved THOR, since there's nothing deep and complicated going on, to think about after movie.
These line of characters and stories were good on earlier movies. Iron Man 1 and 2 was good, The Incredible Hulk was really good. But with Thor and Avengers they started to ruin it. Iron Man 3 wasn't different also. Pointless, repetitive, superficial, shallow...
I still didn't see Captain America which has connection to these series of movies because of the Avengers. I don't know if I can stand with another "America saves the world kills all the bad guys with different colors and cultures from other countries" flick.
Watch it only if you are HUGE fan of that comic character...
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I finally got to watch the movie Thor with Natalie Portman and Chris Hemsworth. While I was never into comic books growing up I do like how the Marvel comics have been brought to life over the last few years. Being a historian and one that likes the different cultures of the ancient world, I liked how the Norse Gods were interpreted in this movie. According to the movie there are nine realms, Earth being one, and Asgard being another. The Norse Gods, as we know them, are protectors, of a sort, several hundred years ago these gods fought a war and won, protecting the other eight realms from Jötunheim, a frozen planet, whose inhabitants want what all evil wants, control. I won't give the whole plot away, IMDb has done that already, all I will say is watch it. It's pretty good. Special effects are great. Anthony Hopkins makes a great Odin. Hemsworth is a great Thor. Can't wait for the sequel to come out this November.
I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and thought that the acting from
certain actors was superb. It had its rough patches and it had its
flaws, but generally, this was an enjoyable and fun movie to watch.
The acting from Tom Hiddleston was marvellous and his character was evil in a sneaky way and I enjoyed his plots and conversations with other characters. His facial acting is also very convincing. Also, I liked Kat Dennings, as she was a nice comedy relief and was better at acting shocked and confused than Natalie Portman.
The plot of a twisted boy who just wanted to have his father's approval was surprisingly original and made for a great story and some great scenarios. It made you feel bad for the villain but also made you hate him at times.
Finally, let us discuss Natalie Portman. I don't believe it was Chris Hemsworth's fault as he stayed true to his character and wasn't too happy-go-lucky about finding a girlfriend, but Natalie Portman's character was confusingly thrown into the plot and was a bit annoying. It was hard to feel bad for her. Her character had next to no chemistry with Chris Hemsworth's character and was a replica of all rom-com girlfriends who were scared of commitment. Truly overdone. She didn't seem as much of a strong female character as Marvel could have made her. She wasn't even that relatable.
Aside from an unnecessary romantic subplot, I liked this movie and would watch it again. Quite interesting and gripping.
|Page 11 of 69:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||Newsgroup reviews||External reviews|
|Parents Guide||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|