To fully convey my feelings on Thor, I have to hand the blog over to my 8-year-old-self. Ally?
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH BEST FILM EVER BEST FILM EVER BEST FILM EVER I'M SPINNING AROUND IN CIRCLES FLAPPING MY ARMS LIKE A BIRD BEST FILM EVER
Ally, turn off the capital locks, please.
CAPITAL LOCKS ARE ENTIRELY NECESSARY FOR I AM SCREAMING THROUGH THE MEDIUM OF KEYBOARD
Could you at least resort to punctuation?
NO TIME FOR ANYTHING BEYOND SPACEBAR THIS FILM WAS BRILLIANT
Alright, just put in paragraph breaks instead of a wall of text, OK?
OK OK OK OK
OK
OK
OK THIS WAS THE BEST COMIC FILM EVER NORMALLY COMIC FILMS ARE SELF CONSCIOUS ABOUT BEING COMIC FILMS BUT NOT THIS ONE KENNETH BRANAGH BRINGS IT LIKE A BOSS FIGHT SCENES ARE INSANE VISUALS ARE IMMENSE DIALOGUE IS GLORIOUSLY HAMMY EVEN FRAMING IS LIKE A COMIC BUT NOT IN THE ANG LEE HULK WAY ITS CINEMATIC BUT NOT SHALLOWLY APING THE COMIC STYLE IT WORKS ENTIRELY WELL IN CONTEXT
THERES A SCENE WHERE THOR FINALLY REGAINS HIS POWERS TO SAVE THE DAY AND IM NOT KIDDING ITS THE SINGLE GREATEST SUPERHERO COMEBACK IVE EVER SEEN JUST THE SHEER MAJESTIC AND AWE INSPIRING POWER OF A GOD OF THUNDER MADE MANIFEST GAVE ME CHILLS IN A WAY ECLIPSING EVEN CHRISTOPHER REEVES SUPERMAN ITS ABSOLUTELY TRANSCENDENT OH MY GOLLY GOSH
CHRIS HEMSFORTH WAS FAR BETTER THAN EXPECTED TOTALLY NAILED THE MIXTURE OF ARROGANT BRASH BRAGGART AND NOBLE HEROIC PRINCE I TOTALLY BELIEVED HE COULD BE THOR GREAT COMIC TIMING GREAT SENSE OF GRAVITAS EXCELLENT PHYSICAL PRESENCE AND FIGHT SCENE PROWESS JUST ALL ROUND GREAT JOB THAT SAID IS HIS BEARD SEEMED LIKE A WISHYWASHY COMPROMISE BETWEEN CLASSICS AND ULTIMATE THOR COME ON DUDE IS THAT BEARD COMING OR GOING
ANTHONY HOPKINS IS ALWAYS FANTASTIC IN ANYTHING HE DOES NATALIE PORTMAN IS GROWING ON ME NORMALLY I DONT SEE THE APPEAL BUT SHE DID A DECENT JOB HERE NO I HAVENT SEEN BLACK SWAN YET IM STILL MUSTERING THE COURAGE BECAUSE IM NOT GOOD WITH PSYCHOLOGICAL HORROR TOM HIDDLESTON WAS A VERY EFFECTIVE LOKI HE HAD HIGHLY SYMPATHETIC MOTIVATIONS BUT WAS STILL CLEARLY THE BAD GUY
WARRIORS THREE WERE ALL EXCELLENT PARTICULARLY VOLSTAFF BUT FANDRAL WAS TOTALLY CHANNELING ERROL FLYNN SO HE ROCKED TOO SIF WAS GREAT WHY DIDNT THEY LET HER FIGHT MORE SHE WAS TREMENDOUS AND I TOTALLY WANT TO SEE HER IN A CONAN FILM AS VALERIA NOW OF COURSE I WANT TO MARRY KAT DENNINGS WHEN I GROW UP SHES SO CUTE AND PEPPY IN THIS FILM I COULD DIVE INTO THE SCREEN AND GIVE HER A BIG HUG OH WOW SHES SO PRETTY IM SORRY NATALIE IMBRUGLIA BUT YOURE GOING TO HAVE TO BATTLE IN TRISKELION COMBAT YOULL BE DRESSED AS SHAHNA KAT IN UHURAS GEAR DONT WORRY NOT A FIGHT TO THE DEATH I COULD NEVER ALLOW HARM TO COME TO EITHER OF YOU
BEST THING ABOUT THE FILM ALTOGETHER WAS THE PRODUCTION DESIGN OF ASGARD ABSOLUTELY BREATHTAKING TO THE POINT OF HYPOVENTILATION EXACTLY THE SORT OF GRAND MAGNIFICENCE THAT FANTASTIC FILMS SHOULD ASPIRE TO REMINDED ME OF THE LIKES OF METROPOLIS IN ITS SCALE AND GRANDEUR I MEAN WOW MAN AND THE SPACE SCENES WERE GLORIOUS NOT ENOUGH FILMS SHOW THE COLOUR AND CELESTIAL MAJESTY OF SPACE THIS ONE DID THOUGH SO BEAUTIFUL
ONLY MAJOR MISSTEP WAS THE FROST GIANTS DESIGN THEY LOOKED LESS LIKE FROST GIANTS THAN WEIRD BLUE ALIENS BUT THEY WERENT REALLY GIGANTIC IN COMPARISON TO THE ASGARDIANS SO WHY CALL THEM FROST GIANTS IN THE FIRST PLACE WHEN THEYRE ONLY A FOOT OR TWO TALLER THAN ASGARDIANS A SHAME BECAUSE IT ISNT AS IF THEY COULDNT HAVE MADE THEM BIGGER IN POST I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WENT WITH IT WONT SPOIL BUT I STILL THINK THEY COULDVE DONE BETTER
OVERALL AWESOME TRANSCENDENT COSMIC GLORIOUS MAGNIFICENT STUPENDOUS GO SEE IT ITS REALLY GOOD IM GOING TO WATCH IT AGAIN WHEN I GET THE CHANCE WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO
As an 8 year old I probably would have loved it too. But now I'm a bitter 26 year old and I'm allowed to hate it, and pick at its minutia to my hearts content.
ReplyDeleteTheres simply too many things that will distract me. The characters are at least still presented Heroically... which is more than can be said for Neil Gaiman's attempts. I simply feel too strongly for the base material to want to see this. its the same reason I dislike well.. every Historical movie Mel Gibson has ever made.
I loved the film too, Taranaich. It make me feel like a child ;)
ReplyDeleteStop beating around the bush, Al and tell us what you really think!
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you liked it. I'm looking forward to it.
wow, my ears hurt. Glad that you enjoyed it.
ReplyDeleteI don't think many 8 year olds know what "context" means! :)
ReplyDeleteAs an 8 year old I probably would have loved it too. But now I'm a bitter 26 year old and I'm allowed to hate it, and pick at its minutia to my hearts content.
ReplyDeleteAnd you'd be perfectly allowed to. I get the feeling that the vast majority of criticisms of the film are entirely deserved. However, Branagh managed to take me along for such a thrilling ride that the multitude of nitpicks I'd normally be pointing out pass me by. Like "It's a Small World": if you're actively looking for the hydraulics, creaky joints and inaccuracies in relation to ethnic and national stereotypes, then you'll find them; but if you're just lying back and drinking in the sounds, music and enjoyment, then you can miss them entirely. My mam calls it a "theatrical contract," where you make a personal effort to maintain the suspension of disbelief. Some films are just too bad at this, and the suspension fails, but others hold it up. Branagh did for me, but I don't doubt there would be others for whom it failed.
Theres simply too many things that will distract me. The characters are at least still presented Heroically... which is more than can be said for Neil Gaiman's attempts. I simply feel too strongly for the base material to want to see this. its the same reason I dislike well.. every Historical movie Mel Gibson has ever made.
I'd compare it to Batman Begins or Iron Man, personally: a cinematic "re-imagining" of the character. It's frustrating that this still seems to be the norm for films instead of just adapting a comic arc (I'd kill for a Kingdom Come movie, for instance), and I'm just not as well-informed on comics-Thor as you probably are, but I think it did a pretty decent job. Tellingly, my cinemagoing experience was very similar to the experience I had at Transformers - though Branagh's a far superior director, the effects are far more impressive, the actors are far more convincing and Strazinsky's a far better screenwriter. While both managed to take me along for the ride, I don't think the "hangover" will be remotely as painful for Thor.
I loved the film too, Taranaich. It make me feel like a child ;)
It actually reminded me of some '80s films in some way. Can't put my finger on it.
wow, my ears hurt. Glad that you enjoyed it.
... But... nobody actually said anything...
(I kid, Scott McCloud joke)
I don't think many 8 year olds know what "context" means! :)
What can I say, I was a precocious little scamp!
"It's frustrating that this still seems to be the norm for films instead of just adapting a comic arc"
ReplyDeleteIf this movie is successful, they should do a faithful adaptation of Walt Simonson's Surtur/Twilight Sword saga. I'm re-reading it right now and it's even more brilliant than I remembered, and quite cinematic, too. Which of course means they would never do it faithfully.
I have very little love for the Thor Comic.
ReplyDeleteIt can be as faithful or unfaithful to the comic as it wants.. my love is for the Mythology that Lee and Kirby based the comics on.. And I suppose I had just sort of hoped that since it was.. well.. Branagh doing it.. he would force the comic back into line with the Mythology.. and am mainly disappointed by how faithful he seems to be to the comic..
I'm sure that sounds odd.. but I don't really know how else to explain it. I wanted it to look like 13th warrior and instead I got Naboo.
The Asgard visuals were breathtaking. But I thought the plot kind of meandered--after the great opening, Thor wanders around on Earth, looks for his hammer, grapples with SHIELD, and the real villain only develops late in the storyline (and the Casket of Ancient Winters is given a big build up but then fades away). Which I admit may reflect that knowing the comics, I fully expected Loki to be running an elaborate game from the start.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes! to the Twilight Sword saga.
And a good point about the Frost Giants.
Regarding altitudinally challenged giants, this is perhaps at least reconcilable with genuine early Scandinavian mythology, if not necessarily Marvelian adaptations of it. Old Norse "jǫtunn" is typically translated in English as "giant", but though in later Scandinavian folktale the "jǫtnar" often come across as rather comic, oversized bumblers, this is not their depiction in earlier mythology, where they are not necessarily big or even humanoid. The most essential translation of the mythological "jǫtunn" might simply be "monster"; for example, _Beowulf_'s Grendel is described in Old English as a "eoten" (the equivalent of Old Norse "jǫtunn"). In fact Grendel's behaviour points us to the real origins of "jǫtunn/eoten" in Proto-Germanic "*et-una-" < Proto-Indo-European "*h1ed-uno-", with a meaning something like "eater" (and, indeed, English "eat" is cognate with first elements in JǪTunn and EOTen). Accordingly, a Norse "giant" (jǫtunn) was probably originally some kind of monster/demon that consumed (the dead; perhaps such monsters were somehow associated with burial mounds, especially those of much older periods?).
ReplyDeleteNot that any of that really has much relationship to Marvel's Thor or Branagh's adaptation thereof, but, well, anyway .... :)