Thor: Dark World

[UnSub]

Marvel gonna Marvel, be it in comics or on screen.

[Venkman]

Yea, but I am as curious about this as BW. I wondered the same in Iron Man 3. I could write off Fury et al as being on some other adventure, and Thor being all off world and stuff. But Hulk went off with RDJ right after NYC and it woulda been nice for at least a cameo of Banner showing up ith his humility but then getting angered at least for a sec to take out Memento guy.

For the few comics I've read it's always felt like Gotham = Batman and Superman stays away while Metropolis = Superman and Batman stays away kinda stuff. But when there are things that exceed the city, they bring in the JLA and whatever other temporary organization was formed for that epoch of comics.

Maybe Marvel doesn't follow that formula? Or maybe I just made all that shit up because all I read is compiled graphic novels and I only have a few dozen of those anyway so wtf do I know?

[Velorath]

Marvel doesn't follow that formula because in the comics they're almost all based in New York.

[MahrinSkel]

Basically, in DC comics there are several different versions of cities that are a mashup of Chicago and New York, that apparently exist in parallel/orthogonal dimensions so Batman and Superman don't get in each other's way, and every other superhero doesn't get put out of business by one or the other.  Marvel just says "Fuck it, everybody else is busy because we say so except when we say they aren't, and we're not going to bother to explain why."

--Dave

[Tannhauser]

Yeah, what Dave said.  I wouldn't worry too much about it though it'd be nice to have a cameo where an Avenger calls in a fellow Avenger.
 

[Evildrider]

You know why no one helps Thor?  Cuz the actors are on per picture deals.  With the amount of money that they are asking for it wouldn't be plausible to get them to show up in every film.

Other then that.  If you want a comic book explanation...  Why have single title comic books if every issue there were 3-4 Avengers, X-Men, etc. showing up for every story arc.

I swear you guys nerd rage about every little detail.  I don't think most of you have fun at movies.

[Velorath]

It's just a comic book trope. After they've added Hank Pym/Ant Man, and if they ever add the Fantastic Four, you'll be wondering why in a world with Tony Stark, Reed Richards, Bruce Banner and Hank Pym, the average citizen still just has access to the same level of tech we do in the real world.

[Sir T]

Anything else would be socialism.

[MediumHigh]

Basically, in DC comics there are several different versions of cities that are a mashup of Chicago and New York, that apparently exist in parallel/orthogonal dimensions so Batman and Superman don't get in each other's way, and every other superhero doesn't get put out of business by one or the other.  Marvel just says "Fuck it, everybody else is busy because we say so except when we say they aren't, and we're not going to bother to explain why."

--Dave

Well in the DC universe, superheroes rarely have time to themselves. When their not out having a day job, their in costume. Marvel doesn't have that problem. Superheroes spend most of their time dealing with day to day mundane shit and generally spend a lot of time enjoying their non-costume moments. So a lot of the time the lack of crossover tends to be in the vein of "Well Iron man is too busy getting laid, thor is doing thor shit in Asgard, wolverine is in then savage lands being savage and shit, etc etc."

[Ironwood]

Anything else would be socialism.

Yeah, pretty much.

[schpain]

tweets: @impending doom

Nick Fury : "Ancient Dark Evil descending on New York.  Avengers ASSEMB--"

Thor : "nope, nope, i got this.  I brought Loki"

Tony Stark: "I'm balls deep in Pepper, YOLO"

[Mattemeo]

My local cinema just held a double bill of Thor and Thor: The Dark World.

I really liked the first Thor; rate it up there with the first Iron Man and Avengers, so I was a little worried that the second Thor outing just wasn't going to compare well, especially back to back. I was wrong.
It somehow tempers the original film's arch silliness and all-out (balls-out) fabulousness with some higher stakes and a slightly more subdued palette that feels just right. Don't get me wrong, Asgard still looks like a scifi desktop hit with the gayest laserbeam, but it looks more lived-in this time around.
Characterisation remains on top form for the most part; all the best parts from the first film remain the best parts in this one but everyone seems to get some nice character moments. Hiddleston's Loki is still where it's at. Everyone on board must know he steals the show every second he's on screen but they let him do his thing and it still feels fresh.
Hemsworth still performs miracles of likeability with Thor and Portman gets more to do this time round (at one point a groan-inducingly obvious trope is set up only to be dealt with reasonably realistically).
The biggest push in Thor's second outing is the humour, though. The laughs were part of what made the first film work, and they're a huge part of the second; there are some truly brilliant beats in Thor: TDW, sometimes multiple jokes cascading off one-another unexpectedly. It also features what is possibly the finest cameo to date in the Marvel Movie Universe.

[Tannhauser]

Damn you you tease!  Seriously though, good to hear.  I was very skeptical they could pull off the first one and was happily wrong.  Thor is Marvel's version of Supes, so I'm always worried he won't measure up.  Glad the humor is intact.  Marvel knows they are making a superhero movie, not a grimdark midnight of the soul movie.

Someone said Thor 2 was a 'war' movie.  Is that accurate?

[Mattemeo]

I'm not entirely sure what the context or criteria was implied to label it a 'war movie', but it strikes a similar chord to both Lord of the Ring's opening battle scene and some very Starwars-y set pieces. Both Asgardians and the Svartalfar have laser guns! In general it's a lot more fighty than the first Thor.

A couple of things to note; firstly, the film is not without its flaws, which I'll go into when more f13ers have seen it (though for what it's worth I don't find them much of a detriment, mostly just a wasted opportunity).
Secondly, there are TWO post-movie teaser sequences; one just before the main credits crawl after some nifty painterly cast portraits, and another at the very end.

[sickrubik]

The director was Not Happy about the mid credits sequence, apparently.

[Evildrider]

Only cuz it wasn't him that filmed it.

[Mattemeo]

The director was Not Happy about the mid credits sequence, apparently.

I can understand why; it's very tonally out of place, but it's Marvel doing their set-up business for what's coming later. The post-credits sequence is much more on point as a bit of final catharsis.

[sickrubik]

You're both right, from my understanding.

[Sir T]

Saw this tonight with my Girlfriend. We both REALLY enjoyed it. I saw a few plot holes but nothing game breaking or that stopped me sitting back and enjoying it. Its funny and there's plenty of great action. I didn't spot that Christopher Eccelson was the main bad guy at all, excellent work by the makeup artists and his acting. I haven't seen the first one or the Avengers, so I came in on it fresh and I was gratified that it didn't rely too heavily on the other movies, other than "Loki's done bad stuff, yo" and I still enjoyed it. I like how they mixed Norse myth and science fiction as well, very well realized.

Highly recommended by the Sir T jury.

*edit* Didn't see the end credit sequence, just saw the middle one.

[K9]

I saw this, it's daft but fun. Definitely a good popcorn flick.

I think the only thing that irked me (and I'm prepared to be lorelol'd on why this has to be this way)

[Velorath]

[Ironwood]

Yeah.  Way too many Anti-heroes.  Venom was bad enough, but when Sabertooth started that shit, I pretty much checked out.

Not cool.

[Khaldun]

Recent Marvel books with Loki have been great in this respect--he got turned back into a kid and forgot much of his previous life and the whole question of whether a person is destined by natural proclivities to evil was really thought through very well. He's still a very interesting character in Young Avengers, which I quite like in general.

I actually think totally unredeemably evil Loki of the early Thor books is actually not very interesting, and the Loki who predictably takes over every time Odin's napping also got kind of old. Simonson was the writer who came along and started adding in some slightly more rounded or complex motivations for his still-totally-evil actions. Loki in Norse myth is the classic trickster--there's lot of stuff going on, not all of it evil.

[Pagz]

What was the after credits spoiler? I saw one withbut there was one afterward? I was like oh they've been nice and just showed it earlier, unless that was the end credit scene and I'm just crazy.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Not having seen the movie yet I will say that the Loki portrayed in the first Thor movie was not wholly evil in the comic book sense.  He was petty and scheming but he never seemed to really want to hurt any of his family, just rule over them.  Inferiority complex in the extreme but not even close to an irredeemable scourge.

[K9]

Recent Marvel books with Loki have been great in this respect--he got turned back into a kid and forgot much of his previous life and the whole question of whether a person is destined by natural proclivities to evil was really thought through very well. He's still a very interesting character in Young Avengers, which I quite like in general.

I actually think totally unredeemably evil Loki of the early Thor books is actually not very interesting, and the Loki who predictably takes over every time Odin's napping also got kind of old. Simonson was the writer who came along and started adding in some slightly more rounded or complex motivations for his still-totally-evil actions. Loki in Norse myth is the classic trickster--there's lot of stuff going on, not all of it evil.

Not having seen the movie yet I will say that the Loki portrayed in the first Thor movie was not wholly evil in the comic book sense.  He was petty and scheming but he never seemed to really want to hurt any of his family, just rule over them.  Inferiority complex in the extreme but not even close to an irredeemable scourge.

This was my impression too.

[Velorath]

What was the after credits spoiler? I saw one withbut there was one afterward? I was like oh they've been nice and just showed it earlier, unless that was the end credit scene and I'm just crazy.

[sickrubik]

COMEDY BREAK.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/06/thor-loki-poster-china_n_4228126.html

[MediumHigh]

So I find myself at a crossroads. On one hand is indifference, on the other hand its a low level of loathing reserved for things not terribly bad but not even trying, and on the other hand... mew mew?? I can't say I liked this movie but on the other hand there isn't enough hate to call it a bad movie... This is the 80s action movie equivalent of superhero films. Here we have a non-threatening foppish villain, and his non threatening mooks, be the dark and serious to the utter level of not intentional/intentional comedy of this movies 2 hours. We have the most gimped marvel adaption of all time play up being all somber and reflective.... and mostly dull. They made a point of sucking out the blond walking metal band from the character and left us with someone who grapples with complex issues like why can't he bone jane foster. I mean damn. Then you have Loki who mirrors our villain in his inability to see his life and his many failings being entirely his fault.


And the villain? Boy... "I'll GET REVENGE ON THE ASGARDIANS FOR DESTROYING MY WORLD AND PEOPLE"...hmmm dude you kinda did that in the first 5 minutes of the film. I mean hmm... yeah??  

So... lets get a rundown, a Thor movie, barely about Thor, set in a planet, we still know nothing about, whose villain grand plan is to plunge the worlds into darkness....a plan only the asgardians give a shit about I guess... meanwhile Jane foster has space herpes. Overall a passable, if not numbing experience. In much the way Iron Man 2 deflated interest in the Avengers (which was ironically restored with Captain America and Thor last time around), the Dark World shows the cracks in the Marvel Movie Universe.

[Abagadro]

Eh. I though it was good. Some nice humor bits. I thought Alan Taylor did a good job transitioning from TV to the big screen. Someone needs to give Michelle MacLaren the same chance.

[Megrim]

Saw it, quite good. Impressed with the 'dark elf' design, exceptionally well done. Needed more science/magic stuff though.

[Lakov_Sanite]

The bad guy's plan was never to get revenge. It was the same plan that they tried a few thousand years ago "destroy all suns"

Also.....foppish?

[Khaldun]

Good fun film. Nice touches, good humor. Not afraid to be a comic-book, thank god, nor does it feel the need to be all grimdark.

I'm not sure why people are expecting profound commentary or something: there is a limit to what you can do with a film where the fundamental premise is "space aliens who dress up like mythological warriors; one of them likes to come to Earth to play with other superheroes and get a little ass on the side".

[Ghambit]

... "space aliens who dress up like mythological warriors; one of them likes to come to Earth to play with other superheroes and get a little ass on the side".

This sounds like it'd be a kickass movie.  Too bad this one was not it.   
I will say it was a nice breath of fresh air to see some good ol' science-fantasy in the theatre.  The last real helping we had of that was Chronicles of Riddick.  To be clear though, Riddick was a better film.

I dont know what it is but Portman really just seems WAY out of place and a huge distraction in the movie; to the detriment of it.  And the interactions between her and Thor are ponderous at best; not well written at all.  Maybe it's the disneyfication of the franchise, I dunno.  Dennings again outdoes her with her small bit.

The best femme acting roles?  Obviously Rene Russo and Jaimie Alexander.

I'd disagree that it doesn't need to be all grimdark.  Honestly, that's exactly where a lot of Marvel needs to try and go at this point.

[Tannhauser]

Couldn't disagree more.  It was a fun film with some nice twists and surprises.  It was good to revisit Asgard and see lots more of it.  Grimdark has its place, I'm enjoying 'Arrow' for instance, but not here.  Thor is one of the few uber heroes the MCU has and I enjoy watching him punch bad guys through buildings.