IMDb > Thor: The Dark World (2013) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Thor: The Dark World
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 guide
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: The Dark World More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 56:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 557 reviews in total 

389 out of 521 people found the following review useful:

All style, no substance

4/10
Author: FF 9000 from United States
10 November 2013

The acting was solid. The production value was superb. Everything else was really poor.

The back story and character motivations are laughably sparse. Most of the characters are completely one-dimensional, with the possible exception of Loki. The plot is the most boring and typical of all action plots - some "bad dudes who happen to be really ugly" decide to "destroy the world for no reason other than being evil" and "only our hero can save us all", etc. Moreover, it was lazy writing - whenever an absolute miracle needed to happen, it conveniently did, every time.

Of course this is a mindless blockbuster Marvel movie so we shouldn't expect much. But the thing is that these kinds of films CAN be made with a reasonable plot, pacing, and character development. The writers were obviously just going through the motions to cash in on the surefire moneymaker sequel, and from a business perspective it is hard to fault them. But it says a lot about the sad state of Hollywood in 2013 that this film currently has a 7.7 on IMDb.

Was the above review useful to you?

190 out of 283 people found the following review useful:

The Worst Film Of The Year. Loud, Obnoxious and All Over The Place.

2/10
Author: michaelhirakida
8 November 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Go ahead and find this review not useful. But listen to me. I love Marvel films. The Original Spider-man Trilogy was amazing and The Avengers was awesome. But when I saw Iron Man 3 I was bored out of my mind and I felt it was not good. So I lowered my expectations for this movie and hoped it would be better right? Because from what I learned, the lower the expectations, the better the movie. Big Mistake.

Thor The Dark World is all over the map with scenes of badly choreographed action scenes to bad comedy to laughable acting.

I really wanted to like this film because I liked the original Thor. It was really good and it was directed by Kenneth B. who is the man who made The best adaptation of Hamlet Ever. But the movie suffers from production troubles to a bad script.

The Film begins with this super magic thing called the Ether... I think which causes destruction. They find it and this one guy says "Lets Destroy it." but this other guy says "ITS TOO POWERFUL! We must put it in a place where it is easily touchable!" I knew this was going to be a bad film because the beginning suffers from cliché after cliché.

Thor returns to Earth because Jane gets the Ether in her and they must heal her. The Dark Elves who are the bad guys for the film attack Thor's planet and the main baddie tries to line up the main 9 planets and cause darkness everywhere. Thor gets Loki from Prison and they go stop the evil baddie.

The script and direction are extremely weak. The script sucks because the dialogue is horrendous. The acting is hilarious from Anthony Hopkins as Odin as he overacts a lot in this movie.

The action scenes are poorly choreographed and make no sense.

Also, Heroes should have weaknesses. Thor nearly throughout the whole Has none. Why should we care if they are unstoppable without any weaknesses, that takes away the credibility of the character.

Also, this teleporting plot line makes no sense. They go nearly everywhere in this movie. In the final fight scene fall everywhere going back from place to place. They never explain why these teleports are randomly put all over the map but it really annoys me.

The jokes... oh my god. They are so unfunny. Who cares if the Professor guy's pants are not on? Bad comedy has to be understood and this movie doesn't understand comedy. The character of Darcy is obnoxious. She was alright in the first but she always has to say HOLY SH*T 500 times a scene.

The special effects are alright but its not always about the effects. One effect actually hurt my eyes and I didn't know if it was the 3D or if my eyes just hurt.

There are very few good things about this movie. The guy who plays Loki is one of the only redeeming qualities of this movie and he is very convincing. The Stan Lee Cameo is also great and funny like always. There is a awesome twist I wont spoil. But that's about it.

This movie is just super loud in its bad action scenes are poor acting and ear bleeding sound effects.

Thor The Dark World is the worst movie of the year without a doubt. I was disappointed severely. Marvel can be much better then this and I hope Captain America The Winter Soldier does a better job at being a better superhero movie.

25/100 D

Was the above review useful to you?

134 out of 185 people found the following review useful:

Even more shallow than the first.

3/10
Author: Rofflez Wafflez
6 December 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The plot barely exists for this film. Generic evil people try to take over universe, Thor stops them, the end. Which might have been alright but there was very little action in this mindless action film. What little fighting we got was poorly orchestrated and repetitive.

The dialogue is wooden and adds nothing. The characters with the exception of Loki have no depth and only exist as an assortment of clichés. Hiddleston makes for a great Loki but that is literally the only good or interesting thing in the entire film.

Thor continues to be the worst Marvel movie franchise and Hemsworth is possibly the worst actor to ever star in multiple major movies.

Was the above review useful to you?

111 out of 154 people found the following review useful:

Completely on autopilot...

2/10
Author: DarthVoorhees from United States
8 December 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Let me start by saying that I don't hate superhero films. I like them very much when they are done well. I hate laziness in films and superficiality. The problem is that pretty much every superhero film made is very lazy and most of them are entirely superficial. Marvel's initial idea of an Avengers universe was inspired from a marketing stand point but I am beginning to question whether or not it has been a failure from a creative stand point. 'Thor the Dark World' is a terrible movie. It does absolutely nothing to add to the mythos of the character or this Marvel universe. The only reason it exists is to draw up excitement for the next Avengers film.

There are no stakes to this film and there are a lot of places to direct blame. The acting aside from Tom Hiddleston is next to unwatchable. The thing is that this is a very talented cast we are working with here. Anthony Hopkins and Natalie Portman have both won Academy Awards. Stellan Skarsgard is one of the most fascinating character actors in Hollywood. I like Hemsworth a lot too and thought he was great in the first 'Thor' film. But none of them invest anything in the material. Hopkins looks bored and emotes nothing in his delivery. Portman's performance is terrible too and in the process of it being terrible it makes a terrible script look even worse. Jane Foster is a horrible character here. She is by far the stupidest damsel in distress portrayed in comic books recently. Portman is too lazy to give her any sort of character. She punctuates every cheap joke and many of them are just about how ditsy the character is. This kind of writing and performance make me almost agree that comic books offer a flawed and stereotypical depiction of women. Stellan Skarsgard, an actor I think has great depth, is played as a complete fool here. I hated every time he appeared on screen and I am a Stellan Skarsgard fan. I don't place the blame all on him but yeah everyone here did something very wrong in bringing these stupidly conceived characters to life.

In actuality though they are not the biggest problem with the film. The problem is that there is no threat to anything or anyone. The villain here is so completely forgettable and has a plan for evil so half assed that they movie really had no chance of working. This is the ultimate example of a conflict for the sake of having a conflict. If actor Christopher Eccleston is not rewarded a Razzie for his portrayal here than that award show has lost all credibility. Villains even poorly written ones with no motivation like this Maleketh should at least offer the actor the chance to try to ham it up with the tropes of goofy villainy. Eccleston doesn't do that. He has a boring calm delivery that evokes no response but laughter. And since Eccleston's performance is such an overwhelming failure I was drawn to how stupid his make-up looked too.

I wish I could give this a bomb rating, I really do. To be honest though Tom Hiddleston is too damn good in the Loki role to say the film is completely without merit. They don't do anything new with his character here but he's so entertaining and in every Marvel film he adds new layers and nuances to a very interesting character. A whole movie could have been made about this stage of Loki's life and it would have been so much more entertaining and compelling than this load of work. Hiddleston portrays Loki as unchained with no loyalty to anyone. This is the first film where we see him as a trickster and Hiddleston delivers suffice to say. The problem is he isn't really in the film long enough. Jane Foster, Darcy, and Dr Selvig all get more screen time than Loki.

Here's my brilliant business proposition to Marvel. Don't make any movies but Avengers films. Give your golden boy Joss Whedon the four hundred or so million you spent on 'Iron Man 3' and 'Thor the Dark World' and see what he does with it. In watching 'Iron Man 3' and this film it is clear that is where the mindset and passion are.

I hope the Marvel cinematic universe can be saved but I have to say that their track record is looking really bad right now. Kevin Feige and Disney should look back at Favareu's first 'Iron Man' film. It was gutsy and took risks and there was no guarantee of immediate endless sequels.

Was the above review useful to you?

87 out of 124 people found the following review useful:

It's time that comic book fans started to demand more from these films before the entire genre evaporates into a disposable, commercialised heap like it does here

4/10
Author: Likes_Ninjas90 from Australia
30 October 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Thor: The Dark World left me wondering why for all its popularity and box office hype the superhero genre so regularly fails to ignite the faintest trace of excitement and imagination in its narrative and storytelling. This sequel, following Kenneth Branagh's reasonably funny 2011 film, was written by no less than five writers, who between them have only mustered another dull, achingly generic story about saving the world. Aside from less than a handful of funny self-referencing points, this is a hugely disappointing by the numbers blockbuster that under services its embarrassingly rich cast and offers its enormous fanbase too little that is challenging, inspired or even surprising.

What's confusing about the deliberate complacency in the script is that it's entirely unnecessary. There is no financial risk to comic book adaptations anymore to justify this kind of dumbing down. Earlier this year, Iron Man 3 became one of the top five highest grossing films of all time. While Christopher Nolan's Batman films have achieved financial success without succumbing to simplified narrative lines. Some even complained The Dark Knight Rises had too many story threads. How many filmmakers today would crawl over broken glass for a cast featuring Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Idris Elba, Tom Hiddleston, Chris O'Dowd and Stellan Skarsgard? With such talent it's not unreasonable then to ask for more than obligatory special effects and indistinguishable villains, who are included only to prop up pseudo- scientific plot points.

Little effort has been exhausted into humanising these characters. Thor (Hemsworth) is a blank slate who swings his hammer and growls at people. It makes Chris Hemsworth look like a boring actor when we've seen how charismatic he can be, like he was in Rush, with the right material and director. There are fewer fish out of water jokes that I enjoyed in the first film. Natalie Portman, normally a delightful, charming actress, is embarrassed here as Thor's girlfriend, playing a character devoid of plausible emotional responses and desires. Her first reaction after being warped from London to Asgard is to say "Hi!" and "Let's do that again!" Never mind that her skin is now infected with the Aether, a weapon of mass destruction from an ancient group called the Dark Elves (who speak perfect English no less). She's more impressed that Thor told his dad about her! The Dark Elves are led by Malekith (Christopher Eccleston), who wants to use the Aether to destroy the world.

Comic book films rise and fall on the quality of their villains. The Dark World has two, both of whom are substandard. The Dark Elves, branding swords and laser weapons, aren't very interesting. Though Thor's brother Loki (Hiddleston) sometimes brings comic relief to the film's dry, seriousness (I did enjoy one clever shape shifting moment) he still doesn't possess the physicality of Tom Hardy's Bane to be a truly menacing physical threat. Locked up in a cell for nearly half the film, there's not a lot for Loki to do. What should also be a haunting surprise at the end of the film is badly telegraphed. When Thor and Loki inevitably team up, the brothers take a few more punches than you might expect, but still recover very quickly, even after a severed hand. Marvel is a subsidiary company belonging to Disney so this is largely bloodless action.

This is the first comic book feature film by Alan Taylor, who replaced Patty Jenkins under controversial circumstances. Taylor has worked on television shows like Game of Thrones, and he brings little distinction to the action and the way the story is told. The camera isn't particularly mobile and significant plot lines like the Aether are lazily signposted through the film's prologue. He opts to intercut Thor's main story with a subplot involving Jane's scientist friends back on Earth, including an overly excitable Kat Dennings, who are discovering the alignments of Asgard's nine realms, if that matters. Sometimes they lighten the mood but they're still cornball stereotypes (the wacky sidekick, the crazy scientist and the dorky intern) that don't instill any visible subtext to the plot. The two narrative threads collide with Taylor's most elaborate set piece, as Thor fights simultaneously between universes, a battle that is undone by Thor's own indestructibility. Over the closing credits are shots of the film's concept art, which could be totally interchangeable with most of the plotting. It's time that comic book fans started to demand more from these films before the entire genre evaporates into a disposable, commercialised heap like it does here.

Was the above review useful to you?

105 out of 161 people found the following review useful:

My god this is a terrible movie....

1/10
Author: Vinegaroon3 from United States
28 November 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I am not sure where to begin....

Maybe I was a bit lost because I never saw the first "Thor"...and I am not familiar with the character and what he is all about...

But regardless...this movie was rambling and disjointed. All the characters were so superficial and one dimensional that I did not care in the least what happened to any of them. Apparently the entire universe was at risk, and this film managed to make that prospect completely boring and leave the viewer 100% indifferent about the outcome. Impressive.

There were a few attempts at humor thrown into the movie. They were all childish...they failed...and in fact were so "unfunny" they made me cringe.

About Thor. How interesting is a character who is apparently entirely omnipotent....? Near as I can tell, he can neither be hurt nor killed....and can travel the universe at more than the speed of light. Yawn. I have enjoyed Natalie Portman in many films...but even she could not contribute anything useful to this turd.

Having said all this...as of this writing this movie has a 7.6 IMDb rating. I don't get it... I felt I had to post an honest review to counter that nonsense.

Was the above review useful to you?

94 out of 141 people found the following review useful:

This movie is absolute garbage.

2/10
Author: Goran Orescanin from United States
16 November 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Let me start off by saying I had fairly high expectations for this film, not only being a fan of the first film but of Thor as a comic book characters. To be nice, these expectations were not met. To be realistic, this is easily the worst of the Marvel movies. This is my first review so sorry if I jump around a lot with what I say. Let's begin with the characters. Thor was.. okay. He said nor did anything noteworthy really. He didn't grow that much as a character, and simply felt boring. Natalie Portman was horribly boring to watch, and in some scenes her character was written as an idiot. That seems to be a common problem with the movie. Jane Foster? An idiot. Eric Selvig, an originally intelligent character that had some serious, good talks with Thor? Running around naked because the Tesseract made him go insane... or something. It wasn't very clear. Speaking of, if he went insane because of the Tesseract, why was Hawkeye completely okay after a bonk on the head? Darcy? The most annoying girl on the planet. She was meant for comedy but came of as GRATING to listen to and watch. Odin was a douche who didn't know how to rule properly. Malekith was just... boring. The makers had so much to work with, considering in the comics what a clever sorcerer he is, as well as a deranged homicidal madman. In this movie his motivations are unclear and his only character trait was he likes to frown at things with his puffy looking face. Character wise the only saving graces were Idris Elba as Heimdall and Tom Hiddleston as Loki, which did not matter much considering how little they were in the movie. Which is strange because Loki is in the trailer so much, but has MAYBE 20 minutes of screen time. The special effects in this movie were just ugly. Every monster looked fake and many of the scenes looked like they were pulled out of a last gen video game. the set design was okay, but not once did I feel immersed. Everything felt like a flimsy set. It was just an ugly movie to look at. The plot was just all over the place, with cuts to different scenes happening frequently. Many scenes were completely useless could have been cut altogether. Literally the only good scene was when Loki and Thor trick Malekith. Also, considering it was never explained how Loki was able to survive a stab wound, switch places with a guard, then switch places with Odin becoming the new leader of Asgard, the ending makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The dialogue was just... horrendous. There were multiple points where myself and the people I've seen the movie with just laughed at the ridiculousness of what was being said. Speaking of, the movie was farrrrrr too funny. Don't get me wrong, I like comedic relief in these Marvel movies, it works for the established universe but GOD they literally play every scene for comedy it seems. Even the final world ending battle with Malekith was played for comedy. For Christ's sake, THOR RODE TO THE BATTLE IN A SUBWAY CAR. There's a gag where him and Malekith are sliding on the side of a building with office people looking outside blankly, completely meant for comedy.. IN THE FINAL, WORLD ENDING BATTLE. Avengers, Thor, Iron Man 1,2 Captain America, all these movies had the common sense to put the comedy in scenes where it was necessary. Hell, even Iron Man 3, the most comedic movie behind this one had the common sense to say "This is the final battle. Let's make this badass". Another problem with the final battle itself is that it has no 'WOW' moments. There's no real climax, everything is just bleh. OH and Malekith is squished by his spaceship. That's something. Oh and why the hell do Asgardians and Dark Elves have so many technological based things?! They have star ships, turrets, laser cannons, ray guns, etc. There's nothing here that feels like magic, which is what Thor should be about. And the Aether. The main point of the movie. The weapon to spread darkness throughout the universe essentially ushering an era of rule under Malekith. I couldn't tell you a damn thing about this thing other that it spread... darkness. whatever that means. The concepts that this movie is trying to give are incredibly under explained. Where did the Aether come from? Not explained. How did Jane end up actually finding it? Not sure. What's the Convergence? It's when the 9 realms line up so Malekith can... spread... darkness?.. How powerful is it? I have no idea. Apparently universe shattering, but Thor doesn't have much trouble fighting an Aether powered Malekith. It's actually kind of sad how easily he was dispatched. There is little fun to be had in this movie. It's just stupid. I didn't care about a single character besides Loki, who was actually somewhat developed and easily stole the show when he was on screen. This movie is absolute garbage and has ruined Thor cinematically for me. I truly hope Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy are good or I truly worry for the Avenegers 2.

Please save your money. Don't see this movie. Don't tell the studios that this Transformers 2 level garbage is okay to put out, that these characters are okay to ruin. In the end, I give this movie a 2 out of 10, because Idris Elba was good, Loki was fantastic, and it had a single scene in the movie where it gave me a glimmer of hope that it would be redeemed. I'm sure I have far more to address but I'm trying really hard to forget this film and reread the latest Thor comic epic, Gorr the God Butcher. If you want to see some good Thor, read that rather than watching this. Please.

Was the above review useful to you?

65 out of 97 people found the following review useful:

Its a different world...

3/10
Author: FlashCallahan from Leicester, United Kingdom
3 November 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Following on from the events of the Avengers movie, Thor is back in Asgard, delivering Loki, who is damned to spend an eternity in the Asgardian dungeons.

Jane is in London, still pining for the titular character, as she hasn't seen him for two years, but still holding out for him.

But there is a new threat from the dark elves. They seek an elixir type essence that will cause darkness amongst the nine realms.

Jane however has found a portal into one of the realms, and gets infected by the essence. Because the dark elves can trace this source, Thor rescues her and takes her back to Asgard, much to Odins dismay.

But the elves plan an attack on Asgard, and after many lives are lost, Thor realises that only one person can help him, and he's damned for the rest of his life....

The first movie was wonderful. Not only was it exciting and refreshing, but it was one of the funniest Marvel movies released yet. This however takes a huge step back, and really taints phase two of the Marvel releases.

Hemsworth is as good as ever, as is Hiddleston, but apart from Portman, it appears that the rest of the cast have been sidelined, so Thor and Loki can carry on their war of nerves.

It's also very convoluted, narrative is lost as there is so much going on, and by the end of it all, you wondered what on earth went on, an also what happened to a few of the characters, there are plot holes aplenty.

The humour what was wonderful in the first movie, feels really forced in this, and instead of causing unexpected laughter, had me rolling my eyes as to how silly it felt. Dennings is a thorn in the movies side, she is a parody of her character from the first, and ruins every scene she is in.

The best joke in the film, which was in the trailer, steals from Raiders of the Lost Ark anyway.

Visuals are bland and boring, and Asgard feels like something from The Phantom Menace, combined with Flash Gordon, and the rest of the realms could have come from any Lord Of The Rings movie.

Its a shame, because Marvel know they have a winning formula, but here it feels like they are just in it for the money, and all the cool references and a brilliant cameo, cannot save such a disappointment.

Many will call it Thor-some and other play on word praises.

But for me, and I really hate saying this because Hemsworth is really good, it's pretty Thor-ful.

Was the above review useful to you?

58 out of 86 people found the following review useful:

Yep, they got the "dark" part right..

2/10
Author: A_Different_Drummer from North America
6 December 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Well they got the "dark" part right. Does it distress anyone at all that somewhere deep in the bowels of Hollywood there are people who make many times what you make for coming up with the idea that watching a lot of banging and clanging in an alternate universe that -- at its best -- resembles Central Park at midnight is .... entertainment? If it does not, it should. The problem with sequels like this -- aside from the fact that they are actually produced in the first place -- is that they serve no useful purpose other than making the original in the franchise look better than it was. I promise you, IN THE NAME OF ODIN AND ALL THE 9 WORLDS, that half way through this exercise in controlled depression, you will long for Thor 1. (With its really clever opening -- essentially the story of a Boy and his Hammer, having been separated therefrom, and finally reunited). Tom Hiddleston steals all his scenes, in some places he is more interesting huddled in a corner reading a book than all the CGI flashbangs and associated pyrotechnics combined. Sir Anthony -- a man seemingly untroubled by how poorly this phase of his career pales in comparison to his prior work -- is lost behind his eyepatch and almost unrecognizable. Portman has never had better H&M (hair and makeup) and in the chatgroups there are fanboys prattling on about watching this with the sound off. A final factoid: In the 60s, in the days when Marvel was only comics, Thor was never top gun, it was the artwork (flaming yellow hair) and the pleasant predictability of the stories and the arcane language that carried the brand. So far, Marvel has yet to really translate this into film.

Was the above review useful to you?

35 out of 45 people found the following review useful:

This film did not seem to do it for me.

4/10
Author: david-sarkies from Australia
17 November 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I guess it may be the fact that I never actually got into comic books (beyond Asterix and Tintin that is) that this movie didn't really appeal to me. I guess in another way that I did not find that mixing the gods of the Norse pantheon with the world of superheroes really worked all that well. To me it just seemed to be wrong. Okay, I understand that Thor is the member of the Avengers, and the comic series that bears his name is quite popular, but to me parts of this film did not seem to work. In fact I found it quite boring.

Okay, I did manage to spot Stan Lee, and I did like a couple of the twists at the end, but I am also glad that I missed the end-end sequence (as opposed to the end sequence) but then I have never been one who really wants to sit through a bunch of credits just to see the end scene. Some people suggest that we should sit through all the credits to acknowledge the contribution that the people made to the movie, however that may be, and they are entitled to that view, but my understanding is that if your name is in the credits it means a lot more than just me seeing it. I my name was in the credits to a movie I would rather potential employers see it because that is evidence that I have experience working on a film set.

Also, the other thing that gripped me with this film was the numerous references to 'The Avengers'. Now, I have seen The Avengers, but it was over a year ago and I simply cannot remember much of what happened in that film. The references in Ironman 3 were okay because that assumed that you had seen the film but may not have remembered many of the details (I remember a giant centipede flying around New York City and Robert Downey Jnr) whereas this film seemed to assume a working knowledge and deep familiarity with The Avengers, something which simply did not work for me.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 56:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

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