Thor: The Dark World (2013) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
578 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Good, decent solid MCU superhero sequel that is much better than the original ©
rambofan4life25 September 2018
In my honest opinion the sequel "Thor: The Dark World" was much better and the strongest sequel in my opinion, it is a good sequel too "Thor". It was much better than the original for the sci-fi dark fantasy, CGI special effects, better action sequences than in the first one and it is a true sequel to the first film. I like this movie more than Iron Man 2, because it as a good decent solid bad-ass, kick-ass superhero flick. Thor saving the world. I love, love this movie more than the sequel, in my honest opinion this movie get's unfairly criticized by critics and get's the hate that doesn't deserve.

This time the director Kenneth Branagh was replaced by Alan Taylor who did a good, solid job directing the sequel to Thor that does deserve. I have enjoy it more than the first one. I can get in to the story what was it about. (At least it wasn't boring like Justice League (2017) that movie was boring as hell and not logical Thor: The Dark World is.). I love that the romance between Thor and Jane continues. Thor teams up with Loki to save the Nine Realms from the Dark Elves led by the vengeful Malekith, who intends to plunge the universe into darkness. When Dr. Jane Foster gets cursed with a powerful entity known as the Aether, Thor is heralded of the cosmic event known as the Convergence and the genocidal Dark Elves.

What I like about this movie beside the action sequences: Thor protects Jane in Asgard, Jane sees Thor's home and meets his parents. I love the London sequences in Greenwich, the center of the Convergence on the end of the film: Malekith (Christopher Eccleston) plans to unleash the Aether to destroy the universe,

Malekith plans to unleash the Aether to destroy the universe, and that he will do this in Greenwich, the center of the Convergence. Thor battles Malekith, but a portal separates them, leaving Malekith unopposed. Thor comes back in time to help Erik, Jane, Darcy and Ian use their scientific equipment to stop Malekith before he destroy our universe. I love the battle between Thor and Malekith and Erik (Stellan Skarsgård) in which he helps to transport the ship in which it try to fall on Jane and Thor. I love in which Thor and Jane are trapped in a dark dimension Svartalfheim in which they find a portal and they try to stop Malekith from destroying our world.

I love that the cast from the first film returned and reunited with Chris Hemsworth as Thor: Natalie Portman, Jaimie Alexander, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård and Kat Dennings I enjoy those cast so much. Darcy (Kat Dennings) was a good girl. Natalie Portman is a hot bad-ass babe as Jane Foster. I love the CGI, special effects, action Thor fighting's Malekith army with his ships. I love the music score from Brian Tyler who replaces Patrick Doyle from the first film. Jaimie Alexander is a bad-ass babe as Sif, she is so gorgeous and sexy I love her. We see Jaimie the last time in this movie as Sif. Christopher Eccleston was a good villain as Malekith I liked him. Before I forgot Chris Evens did had a briefly cameo role as Captain America in which Loki imitated him.

Enjoyable fun decent, solid good superhero and not bad movie Thor: The Dark World is my favorite MCU film. In 2013 they were still good decent MCU movies today they aren't anymore. 8/10 better than the original MILES way better than Avengers: Infinity War, Black Panther, Guardian of the Galaxy 1 and Vol 2, Doctor Strange, The Incredible Hulk (2008) I don't like those movies.
79 out of 81 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
All style, no substance
ff900010 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.
404 out of 544 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Even more shallow than the first.
redpandarevolution6 December 2013
Warning: 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.
140 out of 201 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Completely on autopilot...
DarthVoorhees8 December 2013
Warning: 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.
115 out of 168 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
The Worst Film Of The Year. Loud, Obnoxious and All Over The Place.
michaelhirakida8 November 2013
Warning: 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
197 out of 300 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
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
Likes_Ninjas9030 October 2013
Warning: 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.
91 out of 136 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
This movie is absolute garbage.
gorangogo16 November 2013
Warning: 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.
99 out of 155 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
This film did not seem to do it for me.
david-sarkies17 November 2013
Warning: 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.
38 out of 56 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Its a different world...
FlashCallahan3 November 2013
Warning: 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.
68 out of 107 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
My god this is a terrible movie....
Vinegaroon328 November 2013
Warning: 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.
109 out of 178 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Yep, they got the "dark" part right..
A_Different_Drummer6 December 2013
Warning: 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.
60 out of 95 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
What did I just watch?
ammarjamal15 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Personally I am more of a DC fan than Marvel, but it seems like everyone has been pressuring me to watch the second installment of the Thor movies, and...it was disappointing.

Thor 2 is directed by "game of thrones" director Alan Taylor who proved that he has a future in Hollywood, Alan Taylor is a great director, Thor 2 looked beautiful and the fight scenes were great. Sadly Alan Taylor's great directing could not overcome Thor 2's disappointing story, in my opinion it is too early to make a Thor film that takes place in Asgard, but it made sense because it seems that the Thor franchise can not survive without Loki.

The film felt very messy as we learn about Malakith, a villain who barely appears in the film, the viewers just have no connections what so ever with the MAIN VILLAIN of the movie. Instead the writers focused on Loki who was amazing in this film, but the countless "is this guy Loki?" confusion was way too much, the viewer was unable to relate, first it was Loki against Thor (in the cell), then it was Loki with Thor (while going to the secret passage) then it was Loki against Thor, but we find out it was a trick...then Loki "dies" BUT we later find out he betrayed Thor...that was Way too much "Lokiception". In the film we see a slight tension between Sif and Jane Foster which I found to be completely unnecessary because except for the awkward looks they give each other, nothing really happens between them. The humor in Thor 2 is outstanding, but it gets repetitive at times. It felt like some points in this film were just not necessary at all! I understand that the writers wanted to make a point but the scenes were very briefly explained (the date in the beginning of the film).

Although Chris Hemsworth did a good job as Thor, but it's starting to get old, I don't get the feeling i get when watching Robert Downey Jr as Iron Man or Hugh Jackman as the wolverine. But Tom Hiddleston is brilliant as ever.

Overall, Thor: The dark world is an overrated film, where we see messy writing, mediocre acting (except for Tom Hiddleston) and unnecessary tension between the characters. Although Thor 2 had some flaws it is still worth watching Alan Taylor's outstanding directing in the film.
34 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
An unfocused mess
j-pryde4 November 2013
The first Thor was probably one of Marvel's more trickier movies since it centered heavily around Norse mythology. To make it work in the "real" world was a massive task. Integrating a billionaire playboy who doubles as a tech-powered superhero, or a scientist who turns into a green rage monster was easier to accomplish than the fantastic world of Asgard, Gods & Monsters.

Credit must go to Kenneth Brannagh who found the right balance between the fantastic and "real" (that's a stretch anyways) world. Furthermore, Brannagh focused on the characters instead of bombastic vfx (he still provided tons of beautiful shot visuals though).

His replacement Alan Taylor however goes in the opposite direction and favors stylish visuals over character development. Worse still, the pacing and tone are all over the place.

The Dark World tries to hard to provide the same brand of humor Joss Whedon is known for but fails to deliver the laughs, or they are rather misplaced.

Bottom line: It's a too unfocused movie that suffers from a weak script and a director who tries too many things at the same time.
53 out of 88 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
First Was Okay, This One Was Meh
fairleyhlloyd8 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This film was just okay. Maybe my expectations were too high for Thor 2. I was really hoping it would improve on the first one (which was good but had so much more potential.) I saw some good reviews for this one and some bad ones, so I tried not to have my expectations up TOO high whenever I saw it on my own.

Don't get me wrong--it was an enjoyable movie. It had its funny moments, many of them involving Tom Hiddleston. There was also more time spent on Asgard, and Jane finally got some more screen time. But overall, the film was average. Perhaps I was expecting more from it, but it fell down from my expectations (only slightly, as I did not love the first film but thought it was just decent). I really, really wanted to love it, but I didn't. So I guess I was disappointed in it.

SPOILER ALERT

The plot of the story was mediocre. We're given a back story about the main antagonist, Malekith, and a little about Asgard and his connection to it, but it's a little incoherent. Which isn't totally bad, I guess, but Malekith's reasons for wanting to destroy Asgard just seem flat to me. He feels like your atypical I-Wanna-Destroy-Your-World type of villain, which has been done many times before.

The way they make Jane get possessed by the evil source or whatever that Malekith needs felt like a forced way to have her in Asgard. She spends a lot of time passing out or cowering behind as battles wage on. It gets a little better near the end, where Jane helps Thor defeat Malekith, but overall she isn't given much to do. I don't expect her to be superman or whatever, given that she has no powers, but I wished she had been given more to do as opposed to being the victim of an evil entity. She also doesn't have enough chemistry with Thor to make me feel like they really love each other.

Darcy was funny in the first film, and still was to an extent in this one, but there was times when she was annoying. She got too much screen time, and I believe that a comic relief needs less so that they remain funny and not get annoying. Her sidekick, or intern, also feels useless and is used to temporally replace Eric Selvig, who, thanks to Loki, has gone insane and does crazy antics for comic relief.

As I mentioned earlier, Loki was fabulous in this film, having very funny one-lines and making smart remarks. However, his motives get a little messy in this film. It makes since that he would be a sort of shades of gray character, but when (and there's a HUGE spoiler coming up here) he is supposedly killed to sacrifice himself for Thor and then appears to be alive and wanting the throne is Asgard as Thor leaves to Earth, I'm left confused. What was the point of Loki "sacrificing" himself if he wanted the throne? Was he pretending to die so that no one would suspect he'd become king? Maybe that's just apart of the mystery of his plot, and I'll have to watch the next film to see. But, as a stand-alone, it's confusing.

Odin is reduced to being a jerk for the sake of the plot. He shows little to no concern for Jane when Thor brings her to Asgard until he discovers what she is possessed with. He also basically tells Thor that the only difference between him and Malekith is that he "will win" the battle. This seems a little out of character from the Odin we met in the first film, who wanted to be a fair and strong ruler. I know why they did it-- to give Thor a reason to want to stay on Earth--but by making Odin do something that seems so rude kind of turns the audience off from his behavior.

Once again, Thor's friends (Sif, Fandral, Volstagg, and Hogun) receive little screen time or anything character development in general. Fandral, Volstagg, and Hogun say little to no words in this film; a possible love triangle between Sif, Thor, and Jane is implied and then quickly gotten rid of. These characters are fun, and I really wish I got to see more of them.

Some of the comic relief felt odd. For instance, Selvig is glad when Thor tells him that Loki dies but quickly offers Thor some very awkward condolences. I completely understand why he would want Loki dead--this IS the man that possessed/made Selvig go crazy, after all-but the audience is led to believe that Loki really has died. Maybe they expected us to know that he hadn't? I know that I didn't believe his death, so maybe that's why. But there were other places where the comic relief felt odd, too, mostly exchanges taking place during the battle scenes. At least they were funny.

And finally, the film feels entirely too short. I get that they might not want to make it longer for budget reasons, but if that's the case then they shouldn't try and throw in character development. Some things just felt rushed, and some characters feel underdeveloped. Admittedly the length is not as bad as it was in the first film, but this is mostly because we've already gotten to know the characters and they are now being expanded on.

SPOILER END

So that's pretty much how I feel about Thor: The Dark World. I guess it sounds like I disliked it more than I liked it, and maybe I do, but it wasn't a bad film. I'd watch it again if someone asked me to, and I'd laugh at the comical parts and still enjoy the movie. It's just one of those instances where a film is okay, or even good, but could have been better.
22 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pure Enjoyment!
jojunno30 October 2013
Occasionally in life there are those moments of unutterable fulfillment which cannot be completely explained by those symbols called words. This sequel is one such moment. I do need to see it again. In terms of pure enjoy-ability, I put it top 3 of all sequels that I have enjoyed.

What I really liked...

-Every single character gets a moment to shine and every single actor cast in these parts are perfect.

-The comedy is perfect. It's such a fine balance overall and everything works because it's very subtle and fits in with certain circumstances.

-Some very tender emotional scenes. I won't spoil anything with specifics.

-Some superb action and what could very well be award winning special effects.

-All characters interactions are great and handled very well. This is a fantasy story that really cares about character first and it shows all the way through. Even Natalie Portman's Jane feel more fleshed out than she did in the original film.

-The set pieces and other realms talked about in the first are seen here and are beautiful and well done. Asgard was even better believe it or not.

-The mid-credit and end credit scenes, both cool. Make sure you stay for both.

Marvel hit a pure home run with this endeavor. This film works because of the great cast and the fact that they took this subject matter seriously but remember to have fun. Chris Hemsworth was again perfect. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie.
130 out of 232 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A sequel just for the sake of a sequel
KineticSeoul17 December 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This is a very unpolished sequel that seems to have gotten made, because they wanted a sequel and more money for the studio (probably more about the money). I liked this less than the previous first installment and I am not even a fan of the first one. It has more action and special effects, but that doesn't make a superhero movie any better. It just wasn't interesting nor did it have anything for me to attach myself to. After few minutes in, I just wanted for the final action set pieces to come in (which is actually cleverly done) and be done with. I know humor isn't suppose to be the part that stands out in a superhero movie, but my goodness, the humor in this is just forced and awful. Some of the characters seem more annoying than beneficial to this movie as a whole and just seemed to be there, because they were in the previous movie in this franchise. This movie brings nothing new to the superhero genre, they had the mentality of "if it works previously, why fix it?" direction. It's like one of those video games that does well with the first installment, but does the same thing with the gameplay and everything for the next installment with a different story with just another different villain that is generic as it gets.

5.9/10
19 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Once again, a sequel comes up short
gregeichelberger15 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
There's nothing more disappointing than a sequel that does not live up to the original film it came from, therefore, my cinematic experiences over the years dealing with such efforts have certainly been tragic.

Yes, there have been second films that have equaled or surpassed the original ("The Empire Strikes Back," "Superman 2," "The Godfather: Part 2," just to name a very few), but these are as rare as Academy Award nominations from "Weird Al" Yankovic.

So, die-hard Marvel Studios fans may want to exit this website now and forgo any bitterness they may feel when they realize this review — while not a whole dismissal of the newest superhero epic, "Thor: The Dark World" — may not exactly be what they want to read at this moment.

True to my nature as an optimist, however, I will highlight the positive points of the new production. First, Chris Hemsworth is the perfect choice to play the stoic, unemotional, dispassionate, apathetic, unmoved Nordic leading deity to a tee (actually, I'm not sure these are good points).

It does not require a whole lot of animation to jump from the sky, punch someone out or throw a hammer. Hemsworth does a very good job in his portrayal of such a character and, as long as he does not try to break the acting ceiling like he did in "Snow White and the Huntsman," I think we'll be all right.

The other good thing about this movie (and it's probably the best) is Loki (Tom Hiddleston, "Midnight in Paris"), the deeply troubled younger (and let's not forget ADOPTED) brother of the first prince of Asgard. It's his third appearance in the role and he has grown quite comfortable as the smirking, conniving schemer.

Here, he makes every scene he's in delectable. It's too bad he is not in more. Plus, the sequences where he appears with Hemsworth are not only the best in the picture, but they elevate the latter's status and acting credentials even higher than they should be.

Okay, we have discussed the positive, now let's look at the concerns. Replacing first installment director Kenneth Branagh (who was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Director — and lead actor — for 1989′s "Henry V") eliminated the whole Shakespearian angle with the fallen brother, the troubled prince and world-weary king, which punctuated the action scenes and made for much more intelligent viewing than your average superhero narrative.

Alan Taylor, while adept at television drama (several installments of "Mad Men," "Game of Thrones" and a host of others), has not helmed a feature film since "Kill the Poor" in 2003. His contribution to this feature — at least as far as the Bard connection goes — is negligible and thus much of the drama of "Thor" is replaced with the mediocre of standard fights, screaming and explosions.

Yes, "Thor: The Dark World" looks good, but there is a troubling blandness and sameness to the enterprise.

Sadly underused (or misused in some cases) are Anthony Hopkins ("Red 2") as King Odin, Natalie Portman ("Black Swan"), Stellan Skarsgård ("The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo") as Dr. Erik Selvig and Christopher Eccleston ("G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra") as the main villain — that's right, Loki isn't even to top bad guy here — Malekith.

Hopkins is given even less screen time than in the first film, while Portman bitches and moans and nags so much about Thor being away one understands his reasoning completely. She is both bland and annoying, a difficult tightrope to walk (see "Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium" for a perfect example).

Meanwhile, Skarsgård has been reduced to a comic relief buffoon and Eccleston, who began his career in 1991 in a great little British film, "Let Him Have It," is easily one of the worst Marvel villains of all-time, sort of a lightweight Bane, but without the menacing demeanor. Heavily made-up and CGIed to the point of complete obscurity, he comes back (after failing numerous time in the past) to use the all-powerful Aether to blow all of the realms to pieces, for whatever that's worth.

The best spy, war and superhero movies have one thing in common — great and terrifying bad guys (Goldfinger, Darth Vader, Lex Luthor, Loki). Malekith is certainly a name few will remember in the annals of filmdom's evil malefactors.

Few will remember the plot of "Thor: The Dark World," as well. Basically Asgard is under assault from Malekith and Thor is forced to release Loki from prison (where he has been since the end of "The Avengers") to aid in the protection of the realms. The real drama is whether the kid brother can be trusted. Seems a logical concern to me. There are trips to other planets and Earth gets a few location shots.

Monsters are destroyed, good guys are pounded and, for a while, we wonder if anyone can survive the onslaught of out-of-control special effects. One funny sequence involves Thor and Malekith bouncing around the universe while the mighty hammer of the Norse god struggles vainly just to keep up with the action.

"Thor: The Dark World" is nowhere near enough to surpass the first experience, and while not a bad movie at all, it just seems like a temporary diversion until a part three (or "The Avengers: Age of Ultron") comes out. Sadly, that's just not enough for a studio with a much better track record than this.
19 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Poor writing and characters
pinkled530 November 2013
There are a number of reasons why I found this film to be disappointing, unlike its predecessor which I enjoyed very much.

1) Underdeveloped Bad Guy Syndrome: I know almost nothing about the bad guy even after watching the film. A dark elf who wants to blow everything up. Apparently that's all we need to know and all we'll ever know about the main villain in the film.

2) Pointless Main Characters: The main characters in this film offer nothing of substance or value. For example, you could have replaced Jane with any other character without affecting the film. She exists solely as plot vehicle. The film does not explore her relationship with Thor, her reaction as a character to being transported to a different world, etc., etc. She's as thin as cardboard, like the rest of the main characters of this film.

3) Very Poor Humor: Almost all of the jokes in this film made me roll my eyes and groan. It's as if the script writers liked the humor in Avengers and attempted to duplicate it without any knowledge of how.

4) Ridiculous Plot Devices: Things in this movie only happen because the script says they have to. For example, Jane being the one possessed by the dark energy. Or the car keys being discovered on another planet. These things make no sense but exist solely because they have to for the plot to continue. I hate that.

I had high hopes for Thor II but in the end it was just another disappointing let down.
90 out of 160 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A good entry into the Marvel Universe
kuuk329 October 2013
Having just watched a premier screening, I am delighted to come away from the cinema to write a positive review. Thor Dark World is a spectacular special effect driven film, much of which is set in Asguard.

I was worried that including Loki yet again might become a little repetitive, but in this film he excels as a great character, I only hope however that they don't overdue his presence in the Marvel Universe. How many times can this guy come back from the dead?

There isn't as much character development as the first film, and Thor's friends are nowhere near as interesting as the Avengers. I guess they simply needed these characters to all remain as they were so as to keep continuity within the Marvel universe, but its noticeable how little impact the storyline will have on anybody.

The armies of Asguard were noticeably lacking in fire-power and weapons (even though they have an armoury), which is made even more evident when an entire guard division bring knives to a laser-gun fight. Their turrents were the only defense they had against an Ariel assault and proved to be practically useless. You would expect them to be better prepared.

The healing powers of Thor, Jane, and even a smashed alien space-craft become a bit of a running joke as well. But at least they get hurt, even if it only takes them a scene to heal. And if smashing every column holding up a building is still not enough to take it down I'm not sure what will be.

Christopher Eccleston played a competent bad guy, although his intentions for what he was doing was still unclear as to why. Its simple to say he was insane and just wanted to kill everybody, but when a threat of that magnitude appears and planetary alignments are in effect, you expect half the Universe to show up and stop him or take advantage of the situation, or come looking to take the power for themselves. I also expected to see the entire army of Asguard come to help out at the end like they apparently did in the past. Not just Thor who appears there by mistake.

The scientist with the miraculous plot saving devise is also a little hard fetch to take in, especially when he creates a remote control for cosmic anomalies. Along with Loki's illusion power which also serves as a convenient plot-saving devise at times. I'm willing to overlook these but there's no denying what they are.

Overall its a good enjoyable superhero movie, which you will want to watch several times and is a decent entry into the Marvel Universe.

P.S. Watch it in 2D, The 3D added little of worth.
202 out of 380 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Bland Hammer
cultfilmfreaksdotcom8 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
The first THOR was a hard sell… A demigod with long blond hair and an ancient hammer isn't your typical brooding comic book hero… And so the earthlings, including Natalie Portman's Jane, a beautifully brainy love interest and her colleagues, including sarcastic hipster chick Darcy, who, using a snarky monotone, second-guesses the bizarre situation, helped make the audience believe this was all really happening…

But after THE AVENGERS, we don't need further confirmation. Thor, played by Chris Hemsworth, is very real and his home-world Asgard is in danger because of a monolithic structure Jane discovers between worlds… Part of which enters her body… And when she quickly travels with Thor to Asgard, the stranger in a strange land concept doesn't quite work like when Thor came to earth…

Although a worthy actress, Portman's tone/voice sounds more like a valley girl in a local arcade. Meanwhile, back on earth, as the scientists gather to figure things out, Darcy's forced comic relief is annoying, distracting, and downright unfunny…

Thankfully there's Thor's "brother", that instigative menace from THE AVENGERS who, locked into a permanent glass structure, is freed to help destroy the big bad (and completely uninteresting) villain…

Thankfully, the dependable Loki, like Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor in SUPERMAN 2… after being replaced as the central villain… keeps the dry humor flowing – some lines hit, other miss, but that's the best thing DARK WORLD has going for it: the camaraderie between two polar opposite brothers in a colorful world where dazzling special effects have an old school matte painting aesthetic, while space ships zoom around like in the STAR WARS (or current STAR TREK) universe…

It's when Thor joins the small band of earthlings to thwart the city-ravaging beast, while strategically jumping from various wormholes into either dimension, that things gets convoluted, ponderous, and with a second AVENGERS already planned, somewhat pointless too…
26 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Well, that was a surprise
newtonpost30 October 2013
Just got back from seeing this and thought I'd put in my thoughts.

This is by far the most intricate and thoughtful of the Marvel films to date, with a great story and some superb performances, particularly Hiddleston's as Loki. The characters from previous Asgard related outings are there, but thanks to some good writing, are more 3 dimensional and therefore, interesting. This is one of the few films that would have benefited from an extra 15 minutes or so to explore further the motivations of the key protagonists.

There is plenty of large scale action, as well as some laugh out loud humorous moments that help to keep this kicking along.

I am both surprised and delighted that this is not only the best superhero movie to date, (even eclipsing Spider-Man 2), but currently the best movie I've seen this year.

Don't miss this!
228 out of 442 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
You should lower your expectations
ouxhan2 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I watched the movie yesterday in the evening and honestly I did not enjoy it at all. Firstly we were shown 50 minutes ( yes 50 minutes!) of advertisement. I can proudly say I know all the kid's toys now.

I was expecting much more better Thor movie however I was wrong. First half was "Narnia" and the second half was "London City Guide for Tourists" founded by some ministers probably.

Odin was same , he always makes mistakes and Thor is always right. It was very weird to watch how they connect Jane Foster character and her fellow friends to the movie . Things happening all the time without any sense. Crazy weirdo scientists ( Hollywood likes to show weirdo crazy British scientist lately - Pasific Rim - Agents of Shield etc..), a very bad villain and thousands of Asgardian Guardians (Lets say headless chickens), very amateur Asgardian King( I do not even let him to drive my car, he is the king of stupidity.). I do not believe someone else could write this movie worse than them. 110 minutes of getting bored just to watch a complete disaster.

By the way weirdos saved the universe with a game-boy and couple of sticks. We do not need any superhero anymore.

If you are 12 okay you will enjoy I am sure.

Stay away!!.

And to Hollywood : Guys OK you can make special effects but please learn how to shoot a proper movie.
38 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Marvel has out done themselves again. Great Film!
icannothit30 October 2013
Infinitely better than the first (which I liked) because of better action, humor and emotion. All those people who were worried about Thor being underpowered are going to be pleased. The effects are wonderful and it is indeed a very funny and a very moving movie in places. I'm happy to report that neither factor is overused or gets in the way of the feel or story. It's the right amount of humor and right amount of angst. Cinematography is great and the score is amazing. Whoever scored this film should do so for the rest of the Marvel movies in my opinion.

I knew they would nail the pathos but was pleasantly surprised by the creative fight sequences. They are phenomenal. Not overly long but when they rage, THEY RAGE. Also, Kurse can rival the Hulk in terms of scary power. He was better utilized than the Destroyer was in the first film. Loki is the scene stealer that was all hoped to see! Jane and Sif add more than eye candy but you would expect no less from Marvel. Hemsworth has cemented his legend as Thor with this effort. My only real disappointed is a minor one. They didn't really show the nine realms in any real detail. It seemed a cop out that hey're just open landscapes. Yet, maybe they didn't want to commit to anything for future movies.

Overall, this is a wonderful movie and maybe Marvel's best solo film.
121 out of 232 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Loved it!
lukewakeman4431 October 2013
For starters, I loved this film! I was a fan of the first but this one is superior in every way. The actions scenes are better, the plot is better and there is great banter throughout the film. Due to these factors it is entertaining and has more than enough in it to keep you interested. The acting is fantastic, especial by Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston, as they work great together and appear to have a great understanding of each others roles. I just can't understand why people don't like this film unless they are not a fan of superheroes. After seeing this film last night I read through a few of the reviews afterwards and was shocked as some people were giving it lower than 7. These people are clearly boring and have no idea about an entertaining film and enjoy watching films that just depress you and have no idea about what a fantastic superhero film this is. I recommend you watch this immediately as you won't be disappointed.
111 out of 212 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Just Wonderful! Packed with action, heartfelt emotion, humor, drama and intensity.
stargatesam31 October 2013
Thor The Dark World is brilliant and completely tops the first film. There are a lot of extremely funny bits in it as well as some dark and moving moments. Probably a much funnier movie than it had any right to be given the subject matter. Loki is done perfectly and the dialogue between him and Thor is superb.

If you're a fan of the first, this certainly won't disappoint at all. Without spoiling anything, the scale of this film is very Avengers-like in that the action pieces are amazing. During a sequence halfway through, I literally turned to my friend and said, "this is freakin' awesome".

Needless to say, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Each frame is packed with action, heartfelt emotion, humor, drama or intensity. I was expecting to simply see crazy mythology with monsters destroying the landscape of the nine realms for two hours. Instead, I was shocked at the depth and complexity of this film. You definitely need your brain and your heart turned on for this one, unlike other CGI mishmashes. If you want a movie with just dumb action and no plot then stay away from this exceptional film. The performances are top tier and the visual effects may be the best I've seen this year. I have to join the majority of people and even critics that are praising this film. It's a true joy and such a pleasant experience.
96 out of 182 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed