IMDb > Thor (2011) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Thor
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Thor More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 73: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 726 reviews in total 

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Skilfully directed entertainment, but nothing special

6/10
Author: Bene Cumb from Estonia
22 July 2012

The first 20 minutes or so were even boring, then some events began to develop... Names like Branagh, Portman, Hopkins, Skarsgård, Russo are usually trademarks of sophistication and high quality, but their performance - at least to me - remained just above average, probably due to mediocre screenplay. All the main issues touched have been scrutinized in so many movies, that Thor became just another "sparrow on the line"...

Of course, as the budget was high, the donors and lenders seemed to want to act for certain: different races, genders and ages were carefully picked. However, technology used is state-of-the-art, fight scenes are carried out in a brilliant way. But the ending is nothing special.

Worth watching, if you are a teen, or you have teenage children and are in need of a family event :)

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Acceptance, if not love, at second sight

5/10
Author: zereshk from Germany
22 January 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

When I first watched this film, I hated every minute of it. The story is full of clichés, the main character is unlikable and the mythological figures are distorted almost to the point of being unrecognizable.

I re-watched the film a while ago after having seen the knockoff "Almighty Thor" and it was then that I realized how bad this film could have been but wasn't.

I realized that this film isn't actually that bad. The portrayal of Asgard and its inhabitants - you can call it distorting or you can call it original. Sure, giving the goddess Sif, whose golden hair symbolizes ripe wheat, *dark hair* (that's the colour of mouldy wheat, FYI) isn't exactly a touch of genius. Transforming the god of fire into an ice giant is more than a stretch as well. And the way they presented the giants was just lazy. Why should beings intelligent enough to seriously threaten the gods live in a kind of rubbish dumb surrounded by debris? But on the other hand, Asgard really did look pretty epic. I can't get over the electric rainbow bridge, but other than that it was really beautiful. And most of the gods looked a lot like I had always imagined them, especially Frigg was spot on. Heimdallr being black and Thor having a Japanese friend didn't bother me at all. I mean, why not? Lots of mythologies have gods with animal heads, a different skin colour is ordinary in comparison. Gods don't have to look like the people who believe in them. Asgard having more ethnic diversity than Midgard was strange, but that was a fault of the Midgard arc, not the other one.

The part of the story that took place in Mdgard was what dragged the film down anyway. I didn't care for any of the human characters and I thought Thor became very unlikable as soon as he lost his hammer. Maybe that's a hidden superpower of his weapon. In contrast, I liked Loki a lot... but not in a good way. He didn't come across as a real villain at all. He didn't seem evil and menacing, he just seemed smart, lonely and under-appreciated. My impulse wasn't to be wary but to want to hug him. From what I hear, he'll be the big baddie in the upcoming Avengers movie - he'd better be a little less relateable there because this kind of villain makes the protagonists come across as cruel. I'm used to rooting for the villain but I have rarely felt so sympathetic towards one.

All in all, this actually is an engaging movie, if not a very smart one. It looks good, it is well acted and it has its moments. 5 out of 10 stars.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Feels a bit rushed, but otherwise a fine movie

Author: Pihlaja from Helsinki
25 August 2013

Thor was always the hardest to introduce into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. While the rest of the Avengers are all human, albeit some with superpowers, Thor, the mythological god of thunder, is anything but. Keeping that in mind, I think this was an excellent adaptation of the comic book superhero that we know and love. It has its flaws, and if you were to write the whole Avengers storyline from a scratch, you'd probably give a character like Thor a miss, but the film makers managed to make it work.

What I like the most about this film is its charm. This stems from the great actor choices, as well as the writing and the dialogues. Chris Hemsworth was a new face for me personally, but I don't think that they could have picked a better Thor. The man has it all, the looks, the attitude, the physical prowess, the charisma. Natalia Portman and Tom Hiddleston are equally great in their roles of Jane Foster and Loki, respectively. The writing, on the other hand, shines through in the dialogues, which are fun to follow and feel real. Hemsworth has some really great lines throughout the entire film, which cause me to laugh out loud no matter how many times I see this film.

In addition, the rest of the cast do excellent job as well, the visuals (especially the design of Asgard) are topnotch and the action scenes are creative and fun to follow.

Unfortunately the movie falters a bit when it comes to the pacing. Most of the first half of the film is spent in Asgard, introducing the world and building up the characters. And while this is all needed and I enjoyed all of it, it causes the time spent on Earth to feel just a little bit rushed, especially the budding romance between Thor and Foster. So perhaps a little more time should have been focused on Earth rather than the various alien worlds, but even as it it, it doesn't ruin the film. There are some things that could have benefited from extra attention (Odin sleep, anyone?), but only the romance really feels like it should have had more time to develop. Otherwise you can buy the fact that the film can only be so long.

Aside from that one flaw, I really think that this is a great film. The characters, the visuals, the plot, they all work and they work well. Marvel can proudly call this one its own and it's a worthy introductory film for the character of Thor.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Best Superhero flick since X-MEN

10/10
Author: ajwin05 from United States
26 January 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I have seen Thor two times already and I freaking love it. It was one of the top five films of summer 2011 and one of the best films the entire year. It will be snubbed at the academy awards but it will get some nominations at the MTV movie awards. Thor is one of the greatest superhero flicks. It is a s good as my other favorite superhero flicks such as X-MEN, The Dark Knight, Spider-man, Superman 2, X-MEN First Class, Watchmen, and Spider-man 2, plus Captain America. People who did not like Thor did not give it a chance. I already am dying to see The Avengers and I need to read some Thor comics as well. I loved the great cast. The best performances were by Chris Hemsworth, Anthony Hopkins, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Ray Stevenson, Kat Dennings, and Stellan Skarsgard. This is the second Hemsworth film I've seen and he's become one of my favorite actors. He was awesome, funny, and gave a kick-ass performance. Thor was a bratty jerk at first defying his Father and boasting about his powers but he became a man on Earth. I liked his romance with Natalie Portman. One of the funniest scenes was when Thor asked for a horse at the pet store. I thought Anthony Hopkins was intimidating but noble and real intense as Odin. I liked when he stripped Thor of his power and banished him. Tom Hiddleston gave a wickedly funny performance as Thor's jealous step sibling Loki. He was evil but had reasons to hate Thor. He was weaker and not super-handsome like Thor. He was a great villain, I liked his armor and his horned-helmet was creepy as hell. I liked it when Loki went to earth and he was dressed like a businessman. I loved the battle at the end between Thor and Loki. Stellan Skarsgard was great in his brief role. Kat Dennings was hot and sexy. Natalie Portman was great too, this is one of her finest roles. The destroyer was a cool villain, I liked it when the shield agents thought it belonged to Tony Stark. Thor was awesome again and everyone should see it.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

One character sells the movie. Everyone else, including the title character, are afterthoughts.

6/10
Author: soloriamagic08 from United States
27 August 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Thor, the movie where a god (alien? demi-god? Not completely sure) changes his century old or so personality in three days. Because of a girl. Come on director if you're going to be cliché at least try not to be so obvious about it. I'm going to review this in parts because I have so much to say about it.

Story- Like I hinted at above Thor is a prince that is exiled from Asgard,a fantasy like world in another dimension, to our meager little planet Earth. Here he has to learn humility if he wants to come home because he pretty much started a realm wide war by being an arrogant prick.The problem with this plot point is that for the first 25 minutes or so, when the story was based on Asgard and one other realm (not earth),the story was actually interesting. That takes a severe nosedive when Thor is thrown to a small desert in the middle of nowhere on our planet. To say this part of the movie was very boring would be like me saying rain is wet. All the interesting bits happen on Asgard with Thor's family, but unfortunately since Thor is the main character it's his sleep inducing antics on earth that we have to follow the most and not the far more captivating Asgardian plot points.

Characters- Overall everyone was decent in their roles. I thought Chris Hemsworth, apparently a newcomer at the time, was good as Thor. He was very arrogant (at first), but overall nice and kinda goofy like a big kid. Natalie Portman, as the earth-based scientist Jane and Thor's unfortunate love interest did what she had to do. However, this wasn't much, but that's the thing her part could have been given to anyone and worked. That's why it was obvious that Portman and Hopkins (to a lesser extent) were only really cast because they were the big name draws in a sea of relative unknowns. Speaking of Anthony Hopkins he had a commanding, but still kind, presence as Odin the King of Asgard.However, the role that shined above all was from,apparently another newcomer, Tom Hiddleston.

He played Thor's younger, quieter, darkly mischievous brother Loki, and my god did he blow everyone out of the water. I watched this movie for the first time on Netflix a few months ago, and not being a superhero movie fan I admit I wasn't expecting much. Especially not the Oscar caliber brilliance from Hiddleston. Loki was a scene stealer and really the sole reason I kept watching to the end.

Romance plot- A plot tumor that should have been regulated to C plot or even better not been in the movie at all. The biggest problem with this plot line however was not its existence, but that the two leads had NO chemistry with each other. To say Hemsworth and Portman didn't have this would actually be an understatement. This is unfortunate since they had it with everybody else. Just sadly not with each other.

Visuals and music-Asgard, and one other world, was beautiful but it was glossy looking and didn't look lived in. It was also very obvious they were on a set in a lot of the interior scenes. Very boxy. The earth scenes were a desert and of course very dry and boring looking. The music had a good fantasy vibe, but it wasn't memorable for me.

The Bad Guy-The villain's overall motivation wasn't executed well, and since this is the essence of his start of darkness a lot more effort should have been done in the writing room in this regard.

Battle scenes -Overall I wasn't in awe. I was barely in meh.

There's supposed to be a war brewing and yet we are not shown this even a little. Definitely takes a whole lot of tension out of the movie in that regard.

A very important character is called a master of magic, his power is this for god's sake, and yet I've seen more magic, big and small, done by the children in the Harry Potter films.

Costumes help you get immersed in a world. Especially in a fantasy setting, but sadly the asgardian's costumes overall looked like they came off the Halloween rack at Wal-Mart. Clearly the 150 million or so budget barely was dipped into for the costume department.

Deleted Scenes- This bares a special mention because after seeing them it's one of those what the hell was the director thinking face-palm worthy things. After watching some deleted scenes from other movies it's usually very obvious why they were done away with. This isn't one of those movies. Even when watching the original cut I felt something was missing. Dialogue that didn't make sense, didn't flow right, or seemed to be gone. Transitions that were off and whole plot points that seem to have more to them then what was shown. Then I watched the deleted scenes and go oh there's the rest of the movie! Why would you cut scenes that fleshed out your overall story and more importantly your characters! The deleted scenes made the movie so much more and it's a shame they were cut.

In summary the script, dialogue, story, and just overall execution wasn't great, but it wasn't terrible either. The acting (especially Hiddleston's Loki) is what overall helped sell it for me. However, in all honestly this is not a movie I can watch in its entirety again. Certain scenes certainly, but not the whole movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Almost a good film

Author: SteveMierzejewski from Poland
10 September 2011

If you are looking for a wall to wall action film, you will be disappointed with Thor. Not that there were not action scenes, but, they are few and do not take up much film time.

If you are looking for a Spiderman-like romance angle for the main character, you have also come to the wrong place. The reason for this, and much of the reason why the film didn't work for me, can be summed up in two words: Natalie Portman. My guess is she took the film for money. She seemed like an actress who showed up on set simply to recite her lines. You can get better acting from a tree stump. Thus, it is difficult to believe that the super hero, no matter how great a nature worshiper he may be, could fall in love with a tree stump. I would have been much happier to see Thor's love interest played by a complete unknown. This would have worked.

The story is slow to develop as much time is taken to set the scene. Eventually, the action moves to earth and it is here that the film livens up. Personally, I wish the entire movie took place on earth. I dreaded returning to the dull life on Asgard. On the other hand, the special effects for this realm are really quite good.

Certainly, the highlight of the film was the acting by Chris Hemsworth. He played the confused, serious, laughable hero angle to perfection. It's too bad he had to work with Portman. Better luck next time.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

well done!

10/10
Author: jcallows from United States
3 October 2011

How could a film about a superhero who's power comes from a hammer be so good? This was what I was thinking before I saw this film so I didn't expect a whole lot. Then I read the reviews and saw that Kenneth Branagh directed it and my hopes were raised. And when I finally saw this film, it didn't disappoint!

The casting was great. Tom Hiddleston as Loki and Anthony Hopkins as Oudin were terrific. And the chemistry between Chris Hemsworth and Natalie Portman seemed genuine. Throw in an engaging story, amazing special effects and an awesome soundtrack, which by the way, was one of the better soundtracks for a comic book movie in recent years, you have a great movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

My heart was racing from start to finish

10/10
Author: cchip96
7 May 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I was excited to see Thor since the first trailer had come out. During that time, I kind of prepare myself for failure if I have been anticipating for a movie once I see trailers that look suspenseful. Take the movie Buried for example. I couldn't wait for that movie, but I was more than disappointed with it. The worst movie I had ever seen. With Thor, though, I was in suspense from start to finish. My eyes were wide open the entire time. I love how they tie some of the plot in with stuff from other movies, such as in Iron Man 2. If you sat through the credits, you saw the S.H.I.E.L.D. agent with the hammer. I recognized that in this movie. Also, if you listen, there is a slight mention of the Hulk. This is one of my favorite movies. I rate this movie up there with Inception and Black Swan.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

I want more

10/10
Author: Kim from United States
7 May 2011

I seriously thought i was watching an hour film. It was going so fast that I wanted more of the story. Natalie and Chris chemistry was there, but their scenes together was too short. Their love story went too fast and they didn't really develop the chemistry. kinda of a bummer.Overall I love the humor, action and the acting was pretty good. They didn't do too much to try to throw people off the story. Which I love about these kinds of movies.

I hate how the ending went though. I hope there's part 2, I'm going to be upset if there isn't.

P.S. Chris .mmhm. you are quiet HOT.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

A very respectable Superhero movie

10/10
Author: The_Ommadawn from United Kingdom
6 May 2011

I went to the cinema expecting yet another ordinary superhero film. Having no prior knowledge of Nordic Mythology or the Thor comics this movie wasn't high on my 'to watch' list.

Thankfully, I took a chance and I was completely blown away by this movie.

I watched Thor with my wife (who wasn't the least bit interested in going to see it). As the end credits started, she turned to me and said 'that is one of the best movies I have ever seen'.

The story, effects, sound, acting, directing are all excellent. I also watched it in 3D and this again was of the highest order.

Thor is a VERY good film and easily the best film I've seen this year (maybe the last 5 years). Highly entertaining.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 5 of 73: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history