Thor Movie as good as Iron Man

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

Saw it yesterday with the wife. Certainly an enjoyable flick. Not great, but a solid "B".

 

The scenes on Asgard were awesome, but I didn't think the story was hurt when it moved to Earth.

[fingfangfoom]

From Box Office Mojo:

 

by Ray Subers

May 15, 2011

 

 

With an above-average hold, Thor easily repeated at the top of the box office this weekend. Bridesmaids had to settle for second place, though its opening was very impressive for an R-rated comedy with no proven talent in front of the camera. The week's other newcomer Priest didn't fare quite so well, opening behind most similar Screen Gems movies. Overall box office was off around five percent from last year, when Iron Man 2 held on to first place for the second week in a row.

 

Thor dipped 48 percent to an estimated $34.5 million to bring its 10-day total to $119.3 million. It held much better than the last two summer starters (Iron Man 2 and X-Men Origins: Wolverine), and also outperformed The Incredible Hulk and Clash of the Titans. Its drop was also about even with the first Iron Man, albeit with a much lower total gross. If Thor can continue to line up with Tony Stark's first outing, it should close around $200 million.

 

 

 

[paperheart]

From Box Office Mojo:

 

by Ray Subers

May 15, 2011

 

 

With an above-average hold, Thor easily repeated at the top of the box office this weekend. Bridesmaids had to settle for second place, though its opening was very impressive for an R-rated comedy with no proven talent in front of the camera. The week's other newcomer Priest didn't fare quite so well, opening behind most similar Screen Gems movies. Overall box office was off around five percent from last year, when Iron Man 2 held on to first place for the second week in a row.

 

Thor dipped 48 percent to an estimated $34.5 million to bring its 10-day total to $119.3 million. It held much better than the last two summer starters (Iron Man 2 and X-Men Origins: Wolverine), and also outperformed The Incredible Hulk and Clash of the Titans. Its drop was also about even with the first Iron Man, albeit with a much lower total gross. If Thor can continue to line up with Tony Stark's first outing, it should close around $200 million.

 

 

 

estimated $500MM worldwide box office- pretty impressive

[Mister_Comics]

I thought the THOR movie was awesome. Maybe I'm easy to please?

 

As for the movie SUPER 8, I only want to see it because the kid in the movie builds Aurora monster models in it and I'm a big fan of those old monster models. If you watch the trailer you will see him working on the Hunchback kit.

[MR SigS]

"I'd be perfectly happy with Hulk becoming controlled by Loki"

 

The end of "The Incredible Hulk" (2nd) Gives me the impression Banner gains control of the Hulk persona. Remember how his eyes pop open, green, and he's smiling? Makes me think he can now control his change.

[fantastic_four]

The end of "The Incredible Hulk" (2nd) Gives me the impression Banner gains control of the Hulk persona. Remember how his eyes pop open, green, and he's smiling? Makes me think he can now control his change.

 

There's nothing else in the film that suggests that in the slightest--Louis LeTerrier more likely just thought having him smile was amusing.

[MR SigS]

The end of "The Incredible Hulk" (2nd) Gives me the impression Banner gains control of the Hulk persona. Remember how his eyes pop open, green, and he's smiling? Makes me think he can now control his change.

 

There's nothing else in the film that suggests that in the slightest--Louis LeTerrier more likely just thought having him smile was amusing.

Well, actually there was a point when, right before Banner dropped from the helocopter to confront Abomination, Betty incredulously asked if he thought he could control it and Banner replied, "Maybe not control it, but focus it..." And at the part I mentioned at the end of the film he seemed to be meditating or concentrating quite hard, fists trembling, when suddenly his eyes open and they're green. Just like they are right before the change. He wasn't in a situation where he was in danger, he wasn't angry, and he wasn't in pain. Just concentrating. And then there was that smile, almost as if her were thinking, "Aha! I can do it!" So there is something in the film that suggests it in the "slightest." Just my opinion.

[Ken Aldred]

I didn't like the 3D in the film at all. I thought it was poorly implemented, a bit pop-up book, quite soft and blurry, and very disappointing when compared to a couple of obviously optimised 3D advertisements shown before it, which worked brilliantly. I took the 3D glasses off briefly at several points throughout the film where I thought there would be minimal enhancement with the process, such as when characters were just driving along in a truck and talking to each other, and I found the 2D much more detailed and sharp, which is the way I'll be watching the film again on DVD or Blu-Ray. The processing tired me out by the end of the film.

[MR SigS]

I didn't like the 3D in the film at all. I thought it was poorly implemented, a bit pop-up book, quite soft and blurry, and very disappointing when compared to a couple of obviously optimised 3D advertisements shown before it, which worked brilliantly. I took the 3D glasses off briefly at several points throughout the film where I thought there would be minimal enhancement with the process, such as when characters were just driving along in a truck and talking to each other, and I found the 2D much more detailed and sharp, which is the way I'll be watching the film again on DVD or Blu-Ray. The processing tired me out by the end of the film.

I agree. High Def will be much better. We didn't realize the showing we went to see was the 3D, but we were there and we weren't going to wait an 1 1/2 hours to see the 2D. I wasn't "wow'd" at all by the 3D, and it was the 1st 3D I'd seen since Andy Warhol's Frankenstein when it came out. I still have a headache from that one

[NewWorldOrder]

Maybe some of you guys do this already, but even if you go through Regal Cinemas you can get your movie tickets if you pre-order them at 35-40% off.

 

I know for me if I pay for the ticket at the box office it is $11.75 or $12.25, so if you buy in bulk it makes a lot of sense to buy directly from them.

 

http://www.corporateboxoffice.com/p-4-premiere-super-saver-ticket.aspx

[rjpb]

I didn't like the 3D in the film at all. I thought it was poorly implemented, a bit pop-up book, quite soft and blurry, and very disappointing when compared to a couple of obviously optimised 3D advertisements shown before it, which worked brilliantly. I took the 3D glasses off briefly at several points throughout the film where I thought there would be minimal enhancement with the process, such as when characters were just driving along in a truck and talking to each other, and I found the 2D much more detailed and sharp, which is the way I'll be watching the film again on DVD or Blu-Ray. The processing tired me out by the end of the film.

 

I saw it in 3D.

 

I didn't feel it added anything (the 3D process was done in post, so none of the shots save maybe some of the CGI were designed for it), but it wasn't distracting either. I would have been happier watching in 2D, mainly because I have to wear the 3D glasses over my regular ones, but my kids still get excited over the process.

 

Oddly the 3D in the Pirates trailer looked awful, and it was actually shot in 3D. It reminded me of those old stereoscopic viewers, where the foreground action pops out from the backgrounds, but still looks 2D within itself.

[Doohickamabob]

I saw "Thor" tonight and thought it was very good.

 

I saw it in 2-D and that was just fine. I dislike 3-D movies that aren't really 3-D, but made to look 3-D in post-production and during a few of the CGI action sequences. I feel like the movie companies are just ripping off customers for an extra four bucks, and I'd rather enjoy the movie without being distracted by my resentment at paying for a sloppily implemented gimmick.

 

Anyway -- "Thor" is a very satisfying movie. It's not a masterpiece or anything, but it shares with other recent Marvel movies (such as "Iron Man") the sense that the people producing the movie really want to maintain quality control and make something that holds up to scrutiny.

 

I can barely think of anything in "Thor" that irked me, other than perhaps Loki's changing motivations -- although even that kept the story dynamic.

 

I liked the way the film is divided between two starkly different worlds: The grandiose outer-space, mythological-yet-science-fictioney kingdom, and the dusty New Mexico town where Thor is sent as punishment/exile for his rash behavior.

 

The space kingdom is a very serious world full of Shakespearean-style interplay and family drama (two sons competing for their father's love and respect). Then, down on earth, the movie has a loose, semi-comedic sensibility, which allows for a little romance as well, but also gets serious enough when it needs to.

 

Nothing in "Thor" feels especially forced or stilted -- everything kind of flows and holds together, even when the story is jumping all over the place, juggling fish-out-of-water comedy, Natalie Portman goo-goo-eyed attraction, or telling epic tales of galaxy-wide wars on a scale that briefly recalls the opening scenes of "Lord of the Rings."

 

There are some cool, colossus-sized monster villains: A giant, galloping troll-like biter, and an enormous medieval-style robot that provokes from a human character a witty callback comment along the lines of, "Is that one of Stark's? He never tells me anything." (Stark being Robert Downey Jr.'s character in "Iron Man.") As usual, Stan Lee has a cameo, and it's one of his funniest.

 

The villains are the Bifrosts, or something. They resemble atheletic gray golems, and I liked the way they're about 1 1/2 times taller than Thor's people, looming over them. They have special ice powers, sort of like the Snow Miser, and red eyes like they're all insomniacs.

 

Much of Thor's world reminded me of a cross between the outer-space metropolis of Dark City combined with the Emerald City in Wizard of Oz. Like Oz, there's a huge pipe-organ or cathedral-shaped building, and there's even a rainbow bridge -- but the tasteful and fairly substantial-looking CGI keeps it far from looking like something from Precious Moments.

 

Thor has four tough fighter sidekicks -- three dudes and a megababe, which a New Mexico human hilariously describes as "Xena, Jackie Chan, Robin Hood..." etc. They're sorta like Dorothy and her three sidekicks, if that group traveled through Oz kicking and making the flying monkeys fear for their lives.

 

Thor's sidekicks all have different weapons (a mace, a sword, an axe, etc.), which reminded me of the antagonists in the first Conan the Barbarian movie. They also gave me a flashback to the trio in Superman 2, and the big axe-wielding dude with the beard is like a cross between the big dumb Krypton villain named Non, Gimli from "Lord of the Rings," and Richard Kiel's "Jaws" character in a couple Roger Moore-era James Bond movies. (Oh yeah, his eyes also remind me of Dabney Coleman!)

 

Thor himself is played by Chris Hemsworth, who was briefly seen as Kirk's dad in the recent "Star Trek" (edited from typo!) movie, but hasn't done much else. Hemsworth does a great job with a beefy role that could easily have been hammy, or cheesy. Hemsworth looks like a super-powered version of Brad Pitt, and the man is in seriously great shape. (As one character says, "He's really cut.")

 

Rounding out the cast is the excellent Norwegian actor Stellan Skarsgard, who brings a little authenticity and possibly distant Viking blood to the proceedings. Natalie Portman is better than usual, but she's almost upstaged by Kat Dennings, who plays Portman's scientific assistant, and is seriously hot although they keep her sexiness muted in frumpy clothes, and mostly use her for comic relief.

 

Anthony Hopkins is of course very good, and makes up for his disturbing rotoscope-animation appearance in "Beowulf," even though for most of "Thor" he has one eye hidden under a patch. I was also glad to see Rene Russo, who plays Hopkins' wife.

 

By far my favorite casting choice is Idris Elba, who played the drug dealer Stringer Bell on the masterful TV series "The Wire." I barely recognized this superb African-American actor in his godlike golden armor and behind the glowering, ever-loyal eyes of his character, who guards access to the wormhole between solar systems. Very very cool. I'm always happy to see actors I like getting the big mainstream-movie roles they deserve.

 

Throughout "Thor" I never felt like looking at my watch, and I never felt the story was getting too predictable -- though obviously this isn't Anton Chekov or anything. The British theater-trained director Kenneth Branagh really holds the picture together and keeps the tone controlled and yet with some warmth. So much of "Thor" could easily become ridiculous, overblown or stupid, and it never does.

 

I also noticed that for a movie that has plenty of battles and fighting, there's a fairly low death count, and that's a welcome relief compared to much of the other fare out there these days.

 

I don't think I'd rush out to see "Thor" a second time or anything, but I am glad I decided to see it in a theater.

[MCJ]

Nice recap, though a few edits: The Bifrosts (sounds like a rock band): Frost Giants

 

Hemsworth was in J.J. "lens flare" Abrams' "Star Trek" not "Star Wars."

 

The megababe and the three dudes: Sif and The Warriors Three.

 

They're sorta like Dorothy and her three sidekicks, if that group traveled through Oz kicking *spoon* and making the flying monkeys fear for their lives.

 

That part made me chuckle. I'm glad you enjoyed the film. Your review had more thought put into it than many of the professional reviews that I read before I saw the film.

[mtlevy]

Saw it with the kids today--thought it was pretty good - no big drawbacks.

 

Saw it in IMAX 3D--wouldn't recommend it, I found the glasses a bit annoying and the effect unnecessary

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

So much of "Thor" could easily become ridiculous, overblown or stupid, and it never does.

 

Agree completely. There were plenty of opportunities for the movie to go overboard and turn out real silly, and they managed to always keep on the right side of the line.

 

I can barely think of anything in "Thor" that irked me, other than perhaps Loki's changing motivations -- although even that kept the story dynamic.

 

 

I can understand him wanting to be rid of his brother, and (after the fact), I could understand him luring the Frost Giant leader (and his birth-father) to Asgard so that he could kill him, In the end, he was probably the most unpredictable villain in a superhero movie since the Joker, and that was refreshing. He was played with a fair amount of subtlety, and I can appreciate that.

 

[DiceX]

I saw "Thor" tonight and thought it was very good.

 

I saw it in 2-D and that was just fine. I dislike 3-D movies that aren't really 3-D, but made to look 3-D in post-production and during a few of the CGI action sequences. I feel like the movie companies are just ripping off customers for an extra four bucks, and I'd rather enjoy the movie without being distracted by my resentment at paying for a sloppily implemented gimmick.

 

Anyway -- "Thor" is a very satisfying movie. It's not a masterpiece or anything, but it shares with other recent Marvel movies (such as "Iron Man") the sense that the people producing the movie really want to maintain quality control and make something that holds up to scrutiny.

 

I can barely think of anything in "Thor" that irked me, other than perhaps Loki's changing motivations -- although even that kept the story dynamic.

 

I liked the way the film is divided between two starkly different worlds: The grandiose outer-space, mythological-yet-science-fictioney kingdom, and the dusty New Mexico town where Thor is sent as punishment/exile for his rash behavior.

 

The space kingdom is a very serious world full of Shakespearean-style interplay and family drama (two sons competing for their father's love and respect). Then, down on earth, the movie has a loose, semi-comedic sensibility, which allows for a little romance as well, but also gets serious enough when it needs to.

 

Nothing in "Thor" feels especially forced or stilted -- everything kind of flows and holds together, even when the story is jumping all over the place, juggling fish-out-of-water comedy, Natalie Portman goo-goo-eyed attraction, or telling epic tales of galaxy-wide wars on a scale that briefly recalls the opening scenes of "Lord of the Rings."

 

There are some cool, colossus-sized monster villains: A giant, galloping troll-like biter, and an enormous medieval-style robot that provokes from a human character a witty callback comment along the lines of, "Is that one of Stark's? He never tells me anything." (Stark being Robert Downey Jr.'s character in "Iron Man.") As usual, Stan Lee has a cameo, and it's one of his funniest.

 

The villains are the Bifrosts, or something. They resemble atheletic gray golems, and I liked the way they're about 1 1/2 times taller than Thor's people, looming over them. They have special ice powers, sort of like the Snow Miser, and red eyes like they're all insomniacs.

 

Much of Thor's world reminded me of a cross between the outer-space metropolis of Dark City combined with the Emerald City in Wizard of Oz. Like Oz, there's a huge pipe-organ or cathedral-shaped building, and there's even a rainbow bridge -- but the tasteful and fairly substantial-looking CGI keeps it far from looking like something from Precious Moments.

 

Thor has four tough fighter sidekicks -- three dudes and a megababe, which a New Mexico human hilariously describes as "Xena, Jackie Chan, Robin Hood..." etc. They're sorta like Dorothy and her three sidekicks, if that group traveled through Oz kicking and making the flying monkeys fear for their lives.

 

Thor's sidekicks all have different weapons (a mace, a sword, an axe, etc.), which reminded me of the antagonists in the first Conan the Barbarian movie. They also gave me a flashback to the trio in Superman 2, and the big axe-wielding dude with the beard is like a cross between the big dumb Krypton villain named Non, Gimli from "Lord of the Rings," and Richard Kiel's "Jaws" character in a couple Roger Moore-era James Bond movies. (Oh yeah, his eyes also remind me of Dabney Coleman!)

 

Thor himself is played by Chris Hemsworth, who was briefly seen as Kirk's dad in the recent "Star Trek" (edited from typo!) movie, but hasn't done much else. Hemsworth does a great job with a beefy role that could easily have been hammy, or cheesy. Hemsworth looks like a super-powered version of Brad Pitt, and the man is in seriously great shape. (As one character says, "He's really cut.")

 

Rounding out the cast is the excellent Norwegian actor Stellan Skarsgard, who brings a little authenticity and possibly distant Viking blood to the proceedings. Natalie Portman is better than usual, but she's almost upstaged by Kat Dennings, who plays Portman's scientific assistant, and is seriously hot although they keep her sexiness muted in frumpy clothes, and mostly use her for comic relief.

 

Anthony Hopkins is of course very good, and makes up for his disturbing rotoscope-animation appearance in "Beowulf," even though for most of "Thor" he has one eye hidden under a patch. I was also glad to see Rene Russo, who plays Hopkins' wife.

 

By far my favorite casting choice is Idris Elba, who played the drug dealer Stringer Bell on the masterful TV series "The Wire." I barely recognized this superb African-American actor in his godlike golden armor and behind the glowering, ever-loyal eyes of his character, who guards access to the wormhole between solar systems. Very very cool. I'm always happy to see actors I like getting the big mainstream-movie roles they deserve.

 

Throughout "Thor" I never felt like looking at my watch, and I never felt the story was getting too predictable -- though obviously this isn't Anton Chekov or anything. The British theater-trained director Kenneth Branagh really holds the picture together and keeps the tone controlled and yet with some warmth. So much of "Thor" could easily become ridiculous, overblown or stupid, and it never does.

 

I also noticed that for a movie that has plenty of battles and fighting, there's a fairly low death count, and that's a welcome relief compared to much of the other fare out there these days.

 

I don't think I'd rush out to see "Thor" a second time or anything, but I am glad I decided to see it in a theater.

 

But how do you compare it to Citizen Kane?

 

 

[DiceX]

So much of "Thor" could easily become ridiculous, overblown or stupid, and it never does.

 

Agree completely. There were plenty of opportunities for the movie to go overboard and turn out real silly, and they managed to always keep on the right side of the line.

 

I can barely think of anything in "Thor" that irked me, other than perhaps Loki's changing motivations -- although even that kept the story dynamic.

 

 

I can understand him wanting to be rid of his brother, and (after the fact), I could understand him luring the Frost Giant leader (and his birth-father) to Asgard so that he could kill him, In the end, he was probably the most unpredictable villain in a superhero movie since the Joker, and that was refreshing. He was played with a fair amount of subtlety, and I can appreciate that.

 

I think what I liked most about Loki was this...

In most movies that have a villain that is going to betray someone, it is almost mockingly hinted at to the point that the audience is thinking "how can they not see it coming?"

Even though you knew it was coming, Loki totally sold it. You knew what was going to happen and you reached the point of sympathy with Loki, then technically he betrays the hero as well as you.

 

Like most good movies, it was only as good as the villain, and Loki was perfect.

 

 

[MR SigS]

 

Anthony Hopkins is of course very good, and makes up for his disturbing rotoscope-animation appearance in "Beowulf," even though for most of "Thor" he has one eye hidden under a patch

 

You had a problem with the patch?

And you can save yourself a lot of typing by refering to "The grandiose outer-space, mythological-yet-science-fictioney kingdom" as "Asgard". We'll know what you mean (thumbs u

Good review, though

[Doohickamabob]

But how do you compare it to Citizen Kane?

 

I liked the part in "Thor" where he's on his deathbed and he mutters "Mjǫlnir..." before dropping the little Asgard-globe.

 

[MR SigS]

But how do you compare it to Citizen Kane?

 

I liked the part in "Thor" where he's on his deathbed and he mutters "Mjǫlnir..." before dropping the little Asgard-globe.