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 6 of 73: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [Next]
Index 721 reviews in total 

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Good, fun movie!!!

8/10
Author: HollywoodVixen90 from United States
13 May 2012

Being a fan of the Marvel comic book movies, I really liked Iron Man and Captain America, I was sure that I would like "Thor". I can now add "Thor" to the list of favorite comic-book films. I like how in "Thor" they use the Norse mythology but they put a cool twist to it. Another thing, Chris Hemsworth(Thor) is totally gorgeous!! I am also a fan of Anthony Hopkins and I thought he did a great job in this movie. The graphics are also AMAZING in this movie!! I love the way they made Asgard look,absolutely breathtaking!! I highly recommend "Thor" if you are a fan of the Marvel comics. Now I can't wait to see "The Avengers"!!!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Surprisingly Good

7/10
Author: gavin6942 from United States
12 May 2012

The powerful but arrogant warrior Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is cast out of the fantastic realm of Asgard and sent to live amongst humans on Earth, where he soon becomes one of their finest defenders.

I have enjoyed Thor as a supporting and humorous character in the past -- both in "Adventures in Babysitting" and one of the early Hulk movies. But I was never convinced he could be the leading character... his story is a strange one outside of Norse mythology.

But here, I think it worked. For me, the biggest concern is how do you reconcile Thor being a god with the other gods of the world? For Christians, there is only one god, so calling Thor a god calls everything into question (in the Marvel Universe). But they made it work here by strongly suggesting he is not, in fact, a god, but was merely seen as one by the old Norse people because his strength was so superior to theirs. Nice save.

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:

Budget =150 million dollars, real value = $10

1/10
Author: mariondowning-427-469344 from America
3 November 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Truly awful that they paid 150 mill and got a movie that is worse than the first Terminator movie in believability and entertainment. Really, the actors must have been paid millions to be in this and just rode the money train (as usual)- e.g. Natalie Portman who can't act beyond 'pretty eyelash fluttering girl in love" and "angry girl in love".

Not to mention the girl from "Two broke girls" (sorry I don't care enough to research her name) who acts exactly the same way in this and anything else I've accidentally caught her in while channel surfing i.e. dry humor delivered like she's a teen-aged emo (or copying Daria from "Daria" who was obviously her acting inspiration). Anthony Hopkins is an amazing man to watch because he can act and he commands the screen- even he couldn't save this 150 million dollar scam film.

The Hemsworth guy is just your typical "get your shirt off for no reason other than to show off the abs and fake tan" male lead (done to death since Sylvester Stallone in the 1980's). Plus he has blue eyes and blonde hair- i.e. the epitome of conventional attractiveness. Yeah yeah no "He was meant to be Norse so he was blonde" apologist ranting thanks, considering everyone else who was supposed to be Norse was not blonde with blue eyes. Hollywood will continue getting away with it while saps line up to pay --- I didn't :D

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:

mediocre and disappointing

Author: oscar-35 from working in Movieland
6 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

*Spoiler/plot- Thor, 2011. Based on the Marvel Comic character, this film follows Thor's exploits in Asguard and on Earth with friends and foes.

*Special Stars- Anthony Hopkins, Renee Russo, Chris Hemsworth.

*Theme- When you're sure you're right, go forward without any worries...

*Trivia/location/goofs- Locations in New Mexico. Be sure not to miss for the Stan Lee Camoe role in this film of a truck driving rancher. Also the 'stinger' after the end titles has a set-up for the next film, The Avengers.

*Emotion- As a ardent follower of this Marvel comic book character many years ago, I considered this film to be mediocre and disappointing. I would have liked this big film to be more on about the characters & plot and less on the battle action. This film seems to be more directed to adolescent boys and fanboy adults. The additional great casting of Hopkins and Russo in important roles seems to be wasted here. It was enjoyable for one viewing.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Tremendously HORrible

1/10
Author: pseawrig from United States
2 March 2013

This movie is dumb, stupid, sophomoric, boring, bland, poorly acted, badly directed, and just plain awful. Its characters are flatter than flat, and its story line is truly uninspired. I cannot believe that Kenneth Branagh trained in the London theater for years just so he could helm a POS movie like this. One thing that I really hated is that Thor's world looks nothing like Scandinavia or anything evocative of a Norse Epic. Instead, it looks like the glossy, low budget, metallic world of Flash Gordon. In fact, all of these crappy superhero movies--Hulk, Avengers, XMen, etc--look alike: slick and cheesy, with oogly googly cheap CGI. Why do people like this dreck? If you enjoyed this movie, please consider yourself a Grade A, certified moron.

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?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Thor 2011 ~ Soap Opera of the Gods

1/10
Author: davidmcbeth3 from United States
18 June 2012

Way too much soap opera with this movie ... Thor never hot it off with earth women before .. & Portman? Terrible choice ... and the other Denning? Annoying b--ch just worried about her iPod. And the Gov't just letting him go once captured? Who thought of this plot? Whoever did should be fired ... and the box office confirms this. You cannot make Thor a movie that adults over 25 would like .. he's THOR, duh. Next movie should be less relationship and more Thor pounding! Odin's actor seems like an old man waiting to die - that's not Odin.

So major tweaking will be needed, I hear another is scheduled for 2013.

But the idiots in filmland likely think that Portman is still a draw, WRONG! She's a has been (or never-has-been if you ask me).

Get rid of Denning ... she stinks.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Just not... good

4/10
Author: exot_shrimp from United States
31 January 2012

This movie was juvenile, poorly written, and idiotic. Written to appeal to the lowest common denominator of humor and action.

Throughout the film you are treated to incredibly dry action sequences of "punch this" "block this" "hammer that", and duologue that begs oneself to roll your eyes at the punch lines and scoff at the mechanical delivery of conversation. You can literally watch Natalie Portman die on the inside as she realizes what a mistake she made to accept the role...

THOUGH there was one funny line which SHONE above the rest of the movie: "This mortal form grows weak. I require sustenance!" I found it quite humorous, but then realized that the only reason I was laughing was because it caught me off guard since EVERYTHING ELSE was poorly delivered/written.

-.- So bad... I love me some super hero movies, but this movie and Green lantern are nearly at the same level of tripe... (Green lantern was just... bad... but thor was just... bad and stupid. Maybe green lantern was a smidge better then? Doesn't say much though)

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 6 of 73: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [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