Od's Blood! Hath ILE no thread for anticipation of THOR 2: The Dark World? Verily?

Set photos blah blah blah

can I just totally girl-up this thread from the get go and say hell yes

http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/images2/aug12/thor2/?p=43

hmph

alternatively? thor morelike phowar amirite

phwoar that should be

i'm just going to quit while I'm ahead

PHO WAR

can I just totally girl-up this thread from the get go and say hell yes

Ha, my wife is usually not one to go for muscle-bound guys (I mean, she married me nudgenudge winkwink), but her crush on Hemsworth is absolutely insane. Unless your broken link image was for Loki, then disregard.

I didn't even know there was a sequel in the works. Cool.

P much sequels for every Avengers related franchise in the works now.

I hope we get a Mark Hulkalo movie. He was the best part of Avengers.

yeah that's the only one I'd be interested in

In the works, I've heard, as is a Nick Fury flick.

what is the deal with the SLJ version of Nick Fury anyway? have they just excised WWII from that character altogether?

I'm hoping that's what they go into with his movie.

let me help veg out

http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/images2/aug12/thor2/images/image0043.jpg

hey're doing a Fury flick and doing a S.H.I.E.L.D. TV show? Wow.

Missing a T there.

what is the deal with the SLJ version of Nick Fury anyway? have they just excised WWII from that character altogether?

They're using the Ultimate Marvel version of Nick Fury, who was reimagined to look like SLJ

fury movie's just a rumor

what is the deal with the SLJ version of Nick Fury anyway? have they just excised WWII from that character altogether?

They're using the Ultimate Marvel version of Nick Fury, who was reimagined to look like SLJ

Actually, they just introduced Nick's bastard son Nick who looks like SLJ into regular Marvel because why the hell not.

I thought it was nudged into pre-production with a bunch of the others after the Avengers did gonzo numbers.

(xpost)

EZ, I saw that but was going to not go there

Which is easier - Nick's bastard son Nick or explaining the Ultimate Universe? Toss-up in my book.

You don't really have to explain the Ultimate universe to explain Nick Fury

But you have to explain why he's not an old white WWII vet. It's easier to say "that's the old grizzled dude's son".

"it's the same character from an alternate universe where he looks like SLJ"

thank you Mordy!!!

yeah I have no idea what it is about Hemsworth or Thor but...crikey

Apples and oranges. I'm going to go with the answer that doesn't involve alternate universes myself.

have no idea what an Ultimate Universe is and kind of don't want to know honestly

would have accepted short, non-nonsensical answer to my question (ie "yes")

well... they didn't, though

so in the Ultimate Universe Fury is an african American general in WWII...? idgi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Nick_Fury#Fictional_character_biography

Nicholas Fury fought for the United States in World War II. During the invasion of Sicily, he, along with Private Fisk and Canadian paratrooper Corporal Howlett, attempted to loot a house. American military police arrived to arrest them, and all three were subdued. Fisk was grazed by a bullet, while Fury was imprisoned in an unknown location alongside several other black men, and Howlett, despite protests that he was Canadian, was also shipped to an unknown location.[5] Fury was selected to be the next test subject for Project: Rebirth, as his blood work most closely matched that of Subject #22, the most successful of the previous test subjects. He was injected with a serum that gave him super-strength, which he used to free himself and the other prisoners, who then escaped. The scientists who were working on him let him escape, deciding that they have all the information that they needed for now.[6]

After attending college in India, Fury enlisted in the U.S. military, where he was deployed into various conflicts such as the Kosovo Wars. He was later assigned to S.H.I.E.L.D.'s Weapon X program in the original Gulf War. While transporting Wolverine in his adamantium cage, an Iraqi guerrilla ambush killed his team and inadvertently freed Wolverine from his prison. After slaughtering the Iraqi guards, Wolverine discovered Fury, the only survivor of the ambush, and transported him back through the desert to the Allied forces. Although Wolverine was summarily subdued and re-imprisoned by his handlers, a bond between the two men was formed.[7] The next day, Fury, already mostly healed, is confronted by General Thaddeus Ross. The General had discovered much was unusual about Fury and questioned him at length, prompting him to reexamine where he was going in life.[8]

Years later, the X-Men were abducted and imprisoned by the Weapon X program. This program was overseen at the time by Wraith, who had previously staged a coup against General Ross. This coup had prevented Ross from dismantling the Weapon X program altogether. Wolverine, the only X-Man who eludes capture, later asks Fury for help in freeing the other X-Men and bringing down the Weapon X program. During the operation, which also involves the Brotherhood of Mutants, Wraith was about to kill one of the X-Men and is shot dead by Fury.[7]

Fury is summarily promoted to General and resumes the duties of the Director of S.H.I.E.L.D. He was tasked with forming a team to battle posthuman threats and resurrecting the Super-Soldier program, two objectives that resulted in the formation of the Ultimates. Fury operates as the commander of the team, at times leading them into action, though he often shares duties with the revived World War II Captain America. Nick Fury is also responsible for monitoring posthumans who are not affiliated with the U.S. Military, including Peter Parker and the X-Men.[9]

ANYWAY ABOUT THIS FILM:

Christopher Eccleston as Malekith the Accursed: The ruler of the Dark Elves of Svartalfheim.
Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje as Algrim the Strong / Kurse: A Dark Elf, who is coerced by Malekith to fight Thor.

Nice! Back to the Simonson run for inspiration. If they keep pretty close to the original plot it should be decent.

Eccelstone! awesome!

yeah Simonson run's a good template

Nicholas Fury fought for the United States in World War II. ...
After attending college in India, Fury enlisted in the U.S. military, where he was deployed into various conflicts such as the Kosovo Wars.

uh okay

why did I even ask...

You're forgetting your own threads, Ned?

It's always too early to anticipate Patty Jenkins's THOR 2

Anyway, here's what I wrote in the other thread:

So, apparently this will be called The Dark World, and the main villain is Malekith the Accursed (played by Christopher Eccleston), and it's also supposed to put Loki on some kind of a redemption arc. Wanna bet it'll end with an after-credits stinger showing Surtur, and in Thor 3 Odin, Thor, and Loki will fight against him together, like they did in the comics?

Also, maybe title hints that the way Thor got to Earth in The Avengers (Odin having to use "dark magic" to transport him there) is actually gonna pay off in this movie, instead of being just an easy way for Whedon to get over the bittersweet ending of the first Thor movie?

― Tuomas, Wednesday, August 22, 2012 11:41 AM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

xpost -- That's brilliant! But people seemed to have noticed this one more, so.

Nice! Back to the Simonson run for inspiration. If they keep pretty close to the original plot it should be decent.

You mean the original plot where one of the main villains they're gonna use in the movie gets his superpowers from an omnipotent, god-like cosmic being, who previously created an artificial planet so that he could put superheroes and supervillains there to fight against each other, and is now roaming Earth so he can learn about human stuff like feelings? And the said villain then becomes a good guy when a bunch of kids convince him that's the right thing to do?

Actually, using that plot would be pretty cool! More seriously speaking though, I hope they do include the awesomely queer scene where Malekith seduces and kills guy while he's metamorphosed into a woman, then turns back into a guy and confesses how lovely it felt. (I doubt they will include Loki turning into woman, even if Straczynski is involved with the sequel too.)

Oh yeah, and here's hoping Thor 3 will be all about the Frog of Thunder!

that sounds cool tuomas

John Leguizamo as Beta Ray Bill

Official description from Marvel:

Marvel's "Thor: The Dark World" continues the big-screen adventures of Thor, the Mighty Avenger, as he battles to save Earth and all the Nine Realms from a shadowy enemy that predates the universe itself. In the aftermath of Marvel's "Thor" and "Marvel's The Avengers," Thor fights to restore order across the cosmos...but an ancient race led by the vengeful Malekith returns to plunge the universe back into darkness. Faced with an enemy that even Odin and Asgard cannot withstand, Thor must embark on his most perilous and personal journey yet, one that will reunite him with Jane Foster and force him to sacrifice everything to save us all.

Starring Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Stellan Skarsgård, Idris Elba, Christopher Eccleston, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Kat Dennings, Ray Stevenson, Zachary Levi, Tadanobu Asano and Jaimie Alexander with Rene Russo and Anthony Hopkins as Odin, "Thor: The Dark World" is directed by Alan Taylor, produced by Kevin Feige, from a story by Don Payne (credit not final) and screenplay by Christopher Yost and Christopher Markus & Stephen McFeely (credit not final) and is based on Marvel's classic Super Hero Thor, who first appeared in the comic book "Journey into Mystery" #83 in August, 1962.

with Rene Russo and Anthony Hopkins as Odin

man I wish this was actually as presented

it's like one of those two-person horse costumes

oh lord stuck in Loki again

zachary levi nooo

Hollywood's awesomest god-squadder IMO

Love his personal life section on Wikipedia:

Levi is a sports car and motorcycle enthusiast and owns a 2009 Nissan GT-R. He dated Caitlin Crosby from 2008 to January 2010.

Levi is a Christian and has been since childhood. In a 2002 interview with Relevant Magazine, he said, "My job on my set, I believe, is to first just love people and gain that trust with people where they know that I really do love them and care about their well-being, so that when they are running into problems, they will hopefully, at some point, come to me and ask me, 'What is your peace all about? What is your comfort all about? Where do you get your love? Where do you get your talents?' And I can turn to them and say without blinking, 'Jesus Christ.'"

In September 2010, Levi started his own company, The Nerd Machine.

Levi was selected as a participant in the Celebrity All Star Game at NBA All Star Weekend 2011 at Los Angeles. He played for the team coached by Magic Johnson.

Levi is an avid gamer, having first played Super Mario Bros. and has come to appreciate video games for their ability to provide interactive stories

while i can see him potentially plunging the universe back into darkness i'm guessing he just plays a co-worker of portman's trying to creep up on that

Maybe he just plays some sort of Christian gaming nerd who has his theology upset. (And then he drives off on a motorcycle over a cliff going "AAAAAAaaaaa...")

the best part of that quote is "without blinking"

I MUST STARE JESUS INTO YOUR SOUL

Zachary Levi IS...Owl-Man.

"it is important that i don't blink lest people think i am not crazy"

that said fluttering your eyelids before saying "jesus christ" would be kinda weird

tbh Zachary Levi reminds me of of a friend of mine in demeanor and affability, which is partially why I like him so much

He was good in Tangled, but maybe that's because I didn't have to see his face.

since my reasons for hating him are based entirely on ads for chuck and a weak performance in The Squeakquel I really can't throw stones

perhaps he was not bringing his a-game to alvin

I liked loki and the asgard stuff was so cool it reminded me of knights of the zodiac, but natalie portman? AGAIN?

lol ILX Yvonne Strahovski Is Gorgeous Chuck Was A Great Show Fan Club is about to rear its head, be careful

a weak performance in The Squeakquel

...there was a strong performance in said movie?

aka The Nerd Machine

xpost David Cross, ironically enough, does a pro job in those things

since my reasons for hating him are based entirely on ads for chuck

Really the ads for Chuck and Chuck's rabid fanbase are the two things that annoy me about him, although they aren't his fault. Chuck was just this nerd pandering mess.

YOU TAKE THAT BACK SARAH WAS GORGEOUS

um I mean, that show was much better than the ads give credit for

Chuck was p good why bc Adam Baldwin (yeeeees I know he's a douche irl please let's not talk about that)

If you need VG, she'll be in her bunk.

that being said I bailed before the last season bc I got tired of it.

lol phil

I liked loki and the asgard stuff was so cool it reminded me of knights of the zodiac, but natalie portman? AGAIN?

Yeah! Why can't they do it like the myths (and the Marvel comics, eventually) did and hook Sif and Thor up? The character is more interesting than Jane Foster ever was, and from what little screentime she had, the actress playing her is pretty good too.

that actress was hurt during filming, wasn't she?

Chuck was p good why bc Adam Baldwin (yeeeees I know he's a douche irl please let's not talk about that)

― set the controls for the heart of the sun (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, October 15, 2012 11:33 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark

he is??

he's basically Colonel Casey in real life, only more libertarian

If you looked at his twitter, you'd think he was a blogger for Red State.

he's a wingnut, it's kinda disappointing tbh

haha goddamn.

yeah mainly cuz it is 100% what he obsesses on, it's funny cuz the chuck ppl tend to follow each other but none of them follow him. chuck was a fun show and for a couple of seasons a very good show as well. not esp stoked for this, thought the first thor was pretty awful, but stringer bell vs adebisi in norse garb could be fun i guess.

I actually really liked Thor 1

It is one of my daughter's favorite movies. It's not even v. scary for kids because the frost giants are kind of cartoonish. It is goofy but I enjoyed it.

yeah now that i'm thinking about it i can't remember why exactly i thought it was awful (portman not enough of a reason), maybe i wished it was more cosmic/fantastic? have always thought thor is like hulk in that stories focused on him as sole hero don't work or bore me but as a member of a team he's awesome. loki obv a great villain or wild card.

I liked that the actual kernel of conflict was super petty and small scale, but that it spiraled into a big fucking deal (basically an unspoken exercise in tracing the butterfly effect)

http://0.tqn.com/d/movies/1/0/o/p/W/no-strings-natalie-portman-ashton-kutcher-photo2.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-64Z-zulKBzg/TWN1SQ3dZ8I/AAAAAAAAAZg/NaXCcn7Rh1g/s1600/ashton.jpg
http://blog.newsok.com/nerdage/files/2011/04/natalie-portman-thor.jpg
http://creativejamie.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/thor-natalie-portman-chris.jpg
http://d2tq98mqfjyz2l.cloudfront.net/image_cache/1299050589671505.jpeg

hahaha

butterfly effect 3 not streaming on netflix :(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdoaiiEE_EQ

Thor was fun but Natalie Portman competed with Alicia Keys for Least Talented Major Star.

She was fine in Thor, I had no problem with her. Though I barely noticed why bcz Thor

you couldn't not notice her because she was crying and yelling from the Valley of Suck for 100 minutes.

sorry what I...Thor

i think portman can be good, she just doesn't bring much to the table if the role isnt on the page.

alicia keys is untalented? what?

i mean c'mon... ke$ha exists

Ke$ha has "Blah Blah." Alicia Keys has nothing.

show us on the doll where alicia keys touched you, Alfred

did she touch me....there?

smh alf.

i just mean, at least alicia can tinkle some freaking ivories and sing pretty good. i think shes got some cool songs under her belt too but i guess i shouldnt turn this into an ilm thread

Ke$ha can tickle freak ivories too

yeah but that usually doesn't involve a piano

i think "talent" doesn't mean what you think it means, alfred

thor was a fine ol' time, but i'm worried about marvel bringing tv people in for this and the capn sequel

marvel cheap cheap cheap

then again i was worried needlessly about avengers for the same reason, maybe marvel is enough of a machine action-wise they just need the director to keep an eye on banter

i mean captain america himself was down to levi, john krackyzinski, and chris evans and that's not entirely so they could make chris evans look like a plausible choice for captain america. plus aunt robin in the avengers.

iirc the russo brothers (who are doing cap'n 2) said marvel was like "we don't expect you to know how to make bad-ass action sequences, that's our job" and honestly most tv dudes would run a tighter ship on the non-action than favreau did on Iron Man 2.

so did alison brie actually get the captain america job? and MOTHERFUCKER ARE YOU EVEN INTIMATING AT DISSING ALISON BRIE? i mean, um, sorry, russo brothers that's an interesting choice hmm

i have no problem with tv actors, but i think history has proven that a director's imdb page full of tv credits and no other movies does not bode well for a movie

obv talkin' modern-day not talking about altman and playhouse 60 or whatever

well shut my mouth, the russo bros also directed "you me and dupree"

well if the director of the pallbearer can bring us cloverfield who knows what tomorrow will bring

I dunno: a TV director can at least point a camera and keep it at medium shot while people talk. That's what made The Avengers.

It's the Gore Vidal complaint about how the film version of his The Best Man was promoted: "A Franklin J. Schaeffer film." Marvel movies should be just be all "A Stan Lee Joint" instead of wasting time bribing EW and Movieline into writing Kenneth Branagh where-have-you-been profiles.

*Schaffner obv

yeah as i said, just as long as marvel adds all the action. Dialogue made the avengers but the action sequences were great, was really surprised by the solid "thor doing badass shit with his hammer" biz in thor too

lol promoting marvel movies w/ 'a stan lee joint' would provoke suuuuuch outrage

weird by the power of thor coincidence: next whedon flick is much ado about nothing.

I thought you were being metaphorical lol

yeah for all the press about how branagh applied his shakespearean expertise to thor, it didnt seem like something that a lot of other directors couldn't have done

portman apparently was pissed when marvel didnt go with a chick director for thor 2

i dont think television director is as damning a label as it once was, a lot of the people in the HBO and AMC stables are former feature directors or have the talent to move into features, plus as you guys were saying the marvel movie machine has become so advanced that it leaves an imprint as much as the director does - whedon had story beats he couldn't deviate from on the avengers, and the effects and action stuff probably would've been what it was without him. it seems like when marvel's looking for directors it just wants someone who has the right mindset on the characters & story and is good with actors, cuz the machine will fill in the rest

it creates a weird thing where you can discern a distinct directorial voice w/each marvel movie, but in a way that's been watered down and flattened a bit to fit in with the 'brand'

yeah rian johnson has been moving back and forth. i know david simon wanted spike lee to direct the 1st episode of last season of the wire and whit stillman among many others did an episode of homicide. death of tv movies in general probably responsible for lack of recent tv to non-comedic movie jumps like spielberg, mann, etc; the ones that have happened recently - jj abrams, whedon - had established themselves as producers capable of handling a big enterprise, any 'directing' skills just a bonus.

i dont think television director is as damning a label as it once was, a lot of the people in the HBO and AMC stables are former feature directors or have the talent to move into features

there are plenty of decent directors doing TV on the side, but if your imdb page is "shitty indie movie" - a bunch of tv - "shitty indie movie" - a bunch of tv - "big movie project" i think the odds are against your big project being any good, though if the director of Palookaville wants to prove me wrong with Thor 2, I'll be happy if he does

tv directors really have little control compared to film directors, so if someone's been making their name in tv (and as balls suggests, not also producing and running the ship) they tend to be a little hollow

hey, have you seen palookaville? it might be good!

hey, have you seen palookaville? it might suck!

i watched the trailer though

it's about palookas

Whee

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/185d0diyjjqx1jpg/original.jpg

http://www.splashnewsonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/chris-wm900.jpg

<3

Those elves are not as dark as I was led to believe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j41qNcjDoc8&

http://24.media.tumblr.com/977367bcba3a078bf2ac6afbb8fabd43/tumblr_mlon0wN3A61r5gw45o1_500.png

Thor the Bounty Hunter

http://24.media.tumblr.com/fca910a86acf1970011426a1c4f8d360/tumblr_mloo7sl4971rt6kpxo1_500.png

omg lol

And new trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npvJ9FTgZbM

This was a lot less fun than the first one :( Thor is weirdly absent for chunks of the first half, he has no real character arc, and Malekith is a dull dull dull villain. Hiddleston is clearly having a ball again and there are a couple of funny gags but ultimately it feels a bit pointless. Hope the next Captain America movie has a bit more spark to it.

This movie was boring as hell. I co-sign bizarre on the Malekesh being a bore - he has about as much charisma as Nuclear Man of Supes IV. Hell, he even SOUNDS like him.

I liked the first Thor as it was fun, served as a good origin entry, and had Loki to oppose Thor. The problem is, in this film, the screenwriters appear to be making up the rules as they go along. Too many deus ex machina esque solutions to problems.

And boy, are they trying way too hard for laughs in this one.

yeah, it only came to life slightly in the final action scene. Some of the warping stuff was quite fun.

Hiddlestone is ill-served by the script as well. He's got such a great handle on the character but his dialogue is awful

the Dark Elves running around London looked exactly like an episode of Doctor Who

I hated how they introduced a potential love triangle by throwing Sif into the mix and then they pretty much abandon it midway through the movie, doing very little with it.

Dear God, that was Christopher Eccleston as Malekith??? wow, what a waste.

the GOTG teaser was hilariously crap too

I left before that. usually don't but after being bored for two hours I just wanted to bolt.

It appears Benicio del Toro in GOTG is trying to make his performance in The Usual Suspects look like a masterclass in subtlety.

A lot of the Loki stuff was added in reshoots, apparently, at the expense of Malekith scenes which ended up on the cutting-room floor. I wonder how much more fleshed-out the character was originally - there's really nothing to him in the movie as-is.

this one lacked the fish out of water element that gave the first one its charm but imo once again overdelivered against very low expectations. i didn't count on it often looking really great, which it did though it's probably telling when the high point of a comic book actioner is a viking funeral.

hiddleston (and chris o'dowd) did everything they could to make it entertaining and pretty much owned the screen when they were on it. other than that, this is what you get in a modern thor flick: hemsworth still looks the part, hopkins could still do with slightly more gravitas as freaking Wotan, and natalie portman is still a universe-destroying black hole of anti-charisma. i appreciated that they sort of made that literal this time. like maybe that was the joke?

gonna steal that one

the thing that baffles me is that my friends are talking about how amazing this movie is. Even people that disliked Iron Man 3 or weren't huge fans of the first Thor. wtf.

xxp Yeah, the only parts I really enjoyed were reprises of the fish-out-of-water stuff from the first movie; Thor hanging his hammer on the coathook got a proper laugh from me.

Yes, the viking funeral was the visual high point.

forgot about the hammer on the coat hook. see, that was great. and yeah, benicio huh? kind of james-hong-in-blade-runner vibe

Hercules in New York should obviously be the model for these films

The first movie looked great as well though - I thought they did a fantastic job of turning Jack Kirby cosmic craziness into a semi-believable screen world. It's just a shame that the visuals in this were tied to such a bafflingly dull story.

i was intrigued by the subplot of "oh shit we've got to find more screen time for idris. maybe we can squeeze in a heimdall scene... here? no wait maybe here..."

he even got his own little action scene!

It looks like that, now the Marvel cinematic universe is established, further movies in each franchise are going to be exploring different genre elements with characters we already know - Iron Man 3 was a classic buddy-cop action movie and Winter Soldier looks kinda like a paranoid thriller. But what other avenues can you explore with Thor? I really hope we don't end up with a series of diminishing-returns sub-Game of Thrones fantasy plodders.

Thor 3 = Loki on the toilet, mostly

Game of Thrones indeed.

They need to do the Frog of Thunder storyline.

pulling hard for My Dinner With Loki

Beta Ray Bill could be really cool.

Wait, it's boring? I'm taking the kids this afternoon. Boring is not going to work.

i don't think the kids will be bored at all

Enh, I would say it was boring as such - just uninspired. The kids will probably like it.

Er, I mean I wouldn't say it was boring.

OK. I can handle me being bored.

for you, it'll be An Ancient Evil Has Risen From The Intro Voiceover but with a cool viking funeral that reminds you that the Asgardians are pandimensional cosmic beings whose resemblance to vikings and apparent fondness for maxfield parrish is purely an effect of the limits of human vision

haha, otm

Haters be hatin'. This was good and fun. My expectations for superhero movies remain fairly low after years and years of lackluster crap with something as middling as X2 as the high water mark for the longest time. The recent spate of Marvel films have all delivered quite a bit more. I was entertained and not at all disappointed, even if it isn't posing a challenge to any of my favorite films of the decade.

Once you get past Cosmic Kirby, the limits of how to shoehorn Thor into the Marvel U. show up reeeeeal fast, imo.

xpost would take X2, hell even X1 over this movie anyday

its ok... tries pretty hard to be baby lotr but it just makes you think about how much better a job peter jackson does at this stuff than alan taylor, who turned in one of the most generic marvel efforts yet. he belongs in TV. some of the humor plays well, especially when thor's on earth, and some of it thuds. loki brings up the energy level even though i dont think hes a great character or whatever... i guess hes the closest this movie comes to one.

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7892012800/h5605D667/

boycotting Charmin

its ok... tries pretty hard to be baby lotr

Yeah, what went through my mind was "BSG: Rivendell." The Dark Elf ships were very Cylon.

I was fairly well entertained, tho, and the kids did have a good time. It was the right level of exciting/scary for them, with just enough grown-up stuff to make them roll their eyes. (5-year-old: "Oh, they're not gonna KISS are they?")

are they though???

Pantsless Skarsgard was good for intergenerational laughs.

I was reasonably entertained by this. It's very haphazardly structured, even compared to the first Thor movie, but it maintained enough humor and cosmic craziness to keep my interest. I kinda disagree with H4A about the direction and the visuals; I thought Taylor made Asgard look a lot more neat-o than Branagh did in the first movie, where it looked super chintzy. Also I could follow the action, which I appreciated.

The main thing I didn't like were the boring-ass villains (though they looked cool). Complete nonentities.

is Tom Hiddleston naked in this

no but theres a lingering shot of barechested thor that made the audience i saw it with titter

The biggest laugh at my showing was when they first cut to that scene and a lady in the audience experienced an unintentionally-audible moment of deep & lustful longing.

Here's how much grad school had blotted out my view of the rest of the world at the moment: I didn't even know this existed, let alone was in theatres, until I saw this thread. Did the first one even really have that many fans?

if you want to watch this to escape grad school, the movie establishes that the characters are in grad school and have not been paid for two years, and have taken on another unpaid intern.

this was fine and cute, y'all

rmde

there were several different directions i wish they went down, as always, but as an empty actioner it was fine, leagues better than the first one, better than the avengers

not the last shot though that was the worst

or maybe the best, idk

also lol, that tiny look @ GOTG ruined it for you? srsly

hoping that if iron man 3 used lethal weapon as its template thor 3 goes full princess bride tbh

I really enjoyed this

I thought this was a lot of fun! Had its handicaps - bad guy bein' bad just because, etc. - but it was funny, neat to look at, that kind of thing. The whole end was like the cosmic superhero version of those slapstick chases in and out of hall doors.

Plus, I think it's a hoot to go to the theater window and ask for a ticket to "Thor," because Thor.

I kinda disagree with H4A about the direction and the visuals; I thought Taylor made Asgard look a lot more neat-o than Branagh did in the first movie, where it looked super chintzy.

yeah you're right, though it still felt to me at points like a really nice ep of game of thrones. i dunno, i might've been a little unfair to him because of how the movie kept inviting comparisons to better directors like peter jackson and (lol) zach snyder. i also thought he seemed to have a shaky handle on the emotion of a lot of scenes, lots of weird transitions and flat staging. but the climax was cool and well done... it was an entertaining time at the movies dont get me wrong, but pretty thin too imo

why is Kat Dennings so good in these movies and so terrible in her sitcom

OMG, this movie looked so much better than the most recent offerings from Zach Snyder and Peter Jackson. It was definitely thin, but I sorta appreciated that. Comic book movie bein' comic-booky, you know? There were hundreds of issues of Thor, or Hulk, or X-Men, or Spider-Man or whatever. Not everything has to be anything more than a fun standalone adventure. I mean, if memory serves, there was a long stretch of Thor comics where he was turned into a frog.

It might have helped if Malekith wasn't given such tightly crafted facial prosthesis and a digitally pitchshifted voice which rendered him stiff and robotic. basically it felt to me a bit aimless.

The first Thor was a lot more escapist fun to me - this one didn't do much for me.

also DJP otm about Kat Dennings.

I dunno. The first Thor seemed almost literally aimless to me. Like, beyond introducing people to this character, there was, what, a giant robot he fights? I can't even remember the bad guy. Was Loki the bad guy?

The bad guy in this was worthless, too - he reminded me of something from Star Trek, maybe Eric Bana from the reboot? - but I think the movie gets the romp ratio just right. We know Thor is not going to die, so it's just a matter of letting him hit things and be hit (see also: Hulk). What was kind of neat in this one is the way the humans were able to make sense of the semi-mythical mumbo jumbo and translate it to a kind of science, which they in turn use to help these near immortals. Mind over muscle, etc.

All would be lost without Loki, a pretty good villain, especially in these movies. It's a credit to the writing, acting and (mis)direction that you really never know when he's up to no good. Just as he keeps fooling the characters with the same tricks, it works on the audience, too.

Oh gotta say, lame Del Toro cameo makes me anticipate that Guardians of the Galaxy movie even less.

is Hiddleston naked in this

If that's what you're worried about, they throw you a Thor shirtless and washing down scene.

Oh gotta say, lame Del Toro cameo makes me anticipate that Guardians of the Galaxy movie even less.

― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, November 19, 2013 3:19 PM (12 minutes ago) Bookmark

that was the best part tho

the first Thor worked because, as mentioned upthread, the whole "fish out of water" concept. also, the villain in the first film was clearly Loki. The Destroyer was merely the vehicle he sent to kill Thor.

Origin stories have it easier, in a way, because often the 'training' montages or sense of personal discovery tend to be more interesting than films that begin with the superhero already established and comfortable. The reversal of course in the first movie being that Thor already had all of these powers and they were taken from him, so he had to basically slum it as a normal human being in a culture and world alien to him.

I also enjoyed the portrayal of bureaucracy as it works when an alien is discovered, unfurling the existence of S.H.I.E.L.D., etc.

the final 'fight' with Destroyer (and Loki's subsequent arrest) in the first Thor wasn't really all that interesting, but the movie as a whole worked for me.

I do think the new Captain America has the potential to be awesome, which is good cos the first one was snoozeville.

Stellan Skarsgård shows more flesh/screentime than even silver surfer.

My wife had several conversations before we went to see this movie where she was all "eh who cares about Chris Hemsworth, I literally know dozens of guys who are as or more attractive as him in the face" and then the stripdown happened and she was all "I may have to reconsider a few things"

ahahahaha

my takeaway is that I need to get into a gym pronto

Thor should have chosen Sif over Portman also

don't grow a mullet though

Thor should have chosen Sif over Portman also

well yeah, but at least Jane Foster actually did something in this movie beyond going "oh sexy Thor, I would have sciency sex with all your sexing" (nb I don't remember many details about the first movie)

don't grow a mullet though

there is literally nothing sadder in this world than the black man mullet

It killed Eddie Murphy's career.

http://www.afro-style.com/Images_films/un_vampire_a_brooklyn/un_vampire_a_brooklyn_00.gif

beat me to it

that's really much closer to a jheri curl than an actual mullet

I find it sad that I remember more of the plot to Vampire in Brooklyn than Goonies

despite seeing the former only once and hating it

Really can't see how someone could prefer the first Thor to this. First movie was dull as dirt. There was plenty of fish out of water stuff here, too, but more droll. Hanging up his hammer, taking the subway, riding shotgun in the car. Did a better job illustrating Asgaard's place in the world, too, I thought.

I like that they didn't dwell on the love triangle one bit.

my takeaway is that I need to get into a gym pronto

My reaction was the opposite, because when they lingered on Thor, my first though was, man, there is no way, no matter how much I worked, I could look like that. It helps that Hemsworth actually looks the standard superhero seven heads tall.

I know enough about my family's genetics that, if I did turn myself into a gym rat, I could probably get pretty shredded pretty quickly; I'm just lazy and I hate the gym.

I like that they didn't dwell on the love triangle one bit.

oh yeah definitely, I had a moment where I was thinking "oh nooooooooo" when Sif was hitting on him at the post-battle celebration but the movie very wisely said "don't worry dog, shit's unrequited" and went along its merry way

it is deffo better than thor 1

I liked Thor 1 but yeah, I liked this one more

Hah I thought most ilxors hated the fish out of water stuff in the first one.

This was a lot better than I expected. I still think Thor is the weakest link in the cinematic M.U., but this was pretty entertaining, especially the big showdown in London.

This was pretty enjoyable - the final battle was pretty good - though, it's not 2 stops to Greenwich from Charring Cross. Good level of humour throughout. Can't wait for Guardians of the Galaxy!

THey had a follow up episode on Agents Of SHIELD last night. Just in case anybody wants to be a completist or anything. Didn't watch it to the end since the Doctor Who specials started 10 minutes before taht, so not sure if there is any further tie in or if it was a stand alone apart from that.

Just started with trying to clear up the aftermath of teh greenwich scene etc.

Watched half of it and gave up. Think I'm done with that show.

This was p good alright

Do i need to catch the first one?

Ms mac giggles to herself whenever loki says anything

The first one is directed by k branagh and is arguably a lot better.

Yeah, I liked the first one more. It was funnier.

Good good i'll for it so

I can't bear Hiddleston's hair in this.

First one had a couple of great moments of physical humor. Who would have thought Chris Hemsworth would be so great at a pratfall? Beware of the dutch angles, though.

first one has a lot more...um... room to breathe in it. It doesn't play like a traditional superhero movie, and the humor is better. There's a lot more ~moments~ between characters to really do some acting, you get a bit more of a stage feel especially from the scenes with Hopkins in the first one.

not that I didn't like the second one, it's fun... but it had a lot more whizzbang sploding bang crash ragh going on

The first one performed a public service in revealing what a lousy actress Natalie Portman has become.

oh shush she was good

nah she's new winona for sure

Saw this last night, it was pretty damn entertaining! Heavy on the space vikings and stuff. Lots of nonsense and plot holes, but whatever. You really see that Avengers money up on the screen!

what a lot of tedious mumbo-jumbo this was. and i liked the first one.

some of the shots actually reminded me of the star wars prequels - natalie portman talking nonsense in front of a lavish fantastical regal cityscape background

yeah a lot of it was seriously impenetrable and kinda boring

I really dug this, thought it was definitely among the better of the Marvel films. Caught the first one a week ago too, and while that was OK, was way more into Dark World; these movies are so visually lush with a cool alternate magic/tech/alien conceit behind the set, material and character designs, I'm down with (along with Guardians) them getting more into ripping off Star Wars too. That Nine Realms final action set-piece was a lot of fun. (Speaking of which, too bad we only got to see five of them!) The cast is generally quite likeable, especially Hiddleston. Skarsgaard got to be a lot goofier in this one.

lol @ good 'ol Eccles being totally wasted as the villain though

Also Natalie Portman generally doesn't do it for me but for some reason in this series i'm all like 0_0 marry me

hiddleston is great.. and I kinda share your portman feelings but theyre pointed toward kat dennings..

I'm rewatching the entire MCU prior to Infinity War, and having just rewatched this one for the first time since seeing in the theatre, I'd like to revise my review upthread. This was as close to hot trash as the MCU films have gotten (the shows are another discussion entirely). Why didn't they just call it The Movie Where We Were Assigned To Introduce The Reality Stone (Also Thor Is In It, And Loki, Because Why Not). Having also rewatched the absolutely winning and fun Iron Man 3 and Spider-Man: Homecoming this weekend, this one is just kinda insultingly perfunctory and dull. And it makes Ragnarok shine all the more brightly in contrast.

Agreed, this was a slog with little to recommend. Rates with Iron Man 2 imo.

what order are you watching them in? as released?

Yeah, I only fudged the order with Spidey because my gf hadn't seen it yet and because it's mostly self-contained.

The post-credits scene with the Collector and the Mandarin short on the blu-ray were both better than the movie. Pretty damning.

Iron Man 2 and Hulk are both lower-tier but they're fun and didn't feel like someone slogging through a homework assignment. This kinda felt like the Marvel version of a late-period Die Hard sequel (buy generic fantasy action script, change the names and hope audience doesn't notice).

You'd rate IM2 over Dark World? Savage!

I think I liked this at the time but yeah it doesn't really hold up - can barely recall anything that happened in it. I still can't believe they cast Christopher Eccleston and chose to bury him under a ton of prosthetics.

I do think it's hilarious how Natalie Portman's character has just about been wiped out of existence since though.

this one is indeed not very good at all but what it does have in its favour is the priceless shot where thor awkwardly hangs his hammer on the coat rack, an inspired moment of chris hemsworth improv which apparently made taika waititi want to make ragnarok

You'd rate IM2 over Dark World? Savage!

― Nhex, Saturday, March 31, 2018 11:22 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

For sure. I honestly have never understood the IM2 disdain. It's not as good as the first and not terribly action-packed, but there's a lot of fun to be had and good performances. Everyone in Dark World is phoning it in, for the most part. Which is doubly damning because we've seen what these folks (minus Portman) are capable of.

Portman is very possibly the worst actor in the entire MCU and I'm glad they appear to have written her out.

I'd love to see a female Thor like in the comics.

I'd love to see a female Thor like in the comics as long as female Thor is played by basically anyone other than Natalie Portman.

I missed Kat Dennings in Ragnarok.

I thought this revive might be because of this recent C Eccleston interview, esp:

“Working on something like GI Joe was horrendous,” he says, emphasising that the responsibility was his and not anyone else’s. “I just wanted to cut my throat every day. And Thor? Just a gun in your mouth. Gone in 60 Seconds was a good experience. Nic Cage is a gentleman and fantastic actor. But GI Joe and Thor were … I really paid for being a whore those times.”

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2018/mar/11/christopher-eccleston-macbeths-very-insecure-about-his-masculinity-i-am-most-men-are

He's not wrong. Pretty much anyone could've been slathered in latex and plopped in front of the camera for that thankless role. They could've saved some money and repurposed one of the LMDs from the Hall of Presidents. You'd never know from the movie that Malekith is an actual character with an actual personality and motivations and shit.

Sorry if I bump a couple Marvel threads here but I’m catching up on these films in order. I watched this one recently and despite its reputation as arguably the worst film out of all of these MCU flicks I thought it wasn’t particularly bad at all, while at the same time I can’t especially argue too much against its series status. I get a lot of mileage out of the absurdity of the setting and the special effects, plus Hemsworth remains exceptionally good. I have no idea what was going on with the story, now that I’m trying to recall it. It made sense at the time, I guess.

So sure, maybe* it’s the worst but I wouldn’t call it “bad” in the sense that it was poorly executed or acted. It just maybe felt a bit too vague and generic in its major conflicts and its villains.

*so far I think Iron Man 2 might be the worst. Probably not a challop.

IM 2 definitely the worst

it’s v bad, def worse than thor 2

Always thought Thor: The Dark World got a bad rep. I quite enjoyed it, but I saw it waaay after it came out, too. Maybe because it came out between the good Iron Man 3 and the fantastic Winter Soldier it looked worse than it was.

Iron Man 2 is far and away the worst, probably the only one I'm not sure I could ever sit through again.

Sam Rockwell’s spray tan was the only good part of IM 2 to my recollection.

agree

i think that was the last film i recall Mickey Rourke looking like Mickey Rourke version 2.0 before he rolled out 3.0

probably the only cast members who didn't seem bored in that film were Rockwell and Paltrow, and really the latter is extremely good and funny in all of them. you hear so much shit about her IRL but i'm really always amazed at her likability onscreen.

Recent posts seconded. I'm a big Marvel fan & love all of those MCU movies, if I'd rank them I would definitely place Iron Man 2 at the bottom - although I do still enjoy it.

After seeing Thor: The Dark World in the cinema, I remember leaving rather disappointed and thinking of it as one of the lesser ones, but when I later watched it again on Blu-ray I THORoughly enjoyed it, it really surprised me how much so.

It's a shame that Malekith wasn't fleshed out a bit more. But I do think of this movie as a pretty good one.

the latter is extremely good and funny in all of them. you hear so much shit about her IRL but i'm really always amazed at her likability onscreen.

yeah, def - as i think i said elsewhere on ilx, paltrow's talent as an actor is evident in how charming she is in-character as opposed to how insufferable she is as herself

dr strange the worst i think, but these two are bad also.

but i mean i thought winter soldier was dross too.

U mad.

And I will never understand why IM2 is so bad + hated. It's not great but it's fine. A damn sight finer than Thor 2.

the first iron man, by all accounts, was a bit of a lightning-in-a-bottle shoot where they ended up improvising a lot of what made it great

the sequel did the same but for whatever reason it didn't work out nearly as well, possibly (iirc) because mickey rourke was pissed off that a lot of the prep he did for the character ended up being wasted effort since stuff kept changing around him

it's okay but if i never see it again i'll be okay with it

Only lasting effect IM2 had on me was that I still pronounce "bird" in Russian. R.I.P. DJ AM.

the way he says "hey man" to rockwell has never gotten out of my head since i think

"héh. myin."

Bhordd

I dunno, everyone is real good in that movie and seems to be having a good time.

I read a rumor that Rockwell's coming back. I hope that it's so. (He also appears as a fellow inmate of Trevor Slattery in the Mandarin short film that's on one of the blu-rays, in case you have not seen it and would like to.)

man i love sam rockwell

he'd be a great tony stark - casting him as justin hammer was a really smart move

I sometimes wonder if the MCU would have taken off the way it did if Tim Olyphant had scored the role of Tony Stark - I gather he was runner-up or something.

xpost I love him, too, and I want him back! Confessions of a Dangerous Mind is quickly becoming one of my most rewatched movies of the 21st century (up there with Shattered Glass).

xp his audition for constipated bruce banner all through deadwood prob swayed em

rockwell is great

he's so fucking good in moon, playing the same person twice but keeping them very distinct while playing on-set against nothing - it's an astonishing performance

i think olyphant's charisma is very different to downey's - i dunno if he could carry off the devil-may-care lightness (and improvisational skill) that downey brought to the role

Olyphant is more a Wolverine type imo (hint hint, Disney/Fox).

i'd be inclined to agree but olyphant is the same age as jackman tho, unfortunately - no way they'd sign up someone aged 50+ to carry a series of superhero movies

I read a rumor that Rockwell's coming back. I hope that it's so.

Hammer Industries stuff shows about a lot on the Netflix Marvel shows -- among other things, they make the "Judas bullets" that are capable of penetrating Luke Cage's skin. Would love to see him pop up on one of those shows, but getting back into the MCU would be even better.

i dunno if he could carry off the devil-may-care lightness (and improvisational skill) that downey brought to the role

fwiw his track record of coming up with a lot of the better character beats on Justified suggest otherwise, but I'm a stan

don't get me wrong, i think he's great too! i'm glad we got deadwood and justified but i've always been a bit baffled that he wasn't a bigger movie star

Olyphant is more a Wolverine type imo (hint hint, Disney/Fox).

― Funkface LLC (Old Lunch), Tuesday, August 14, 2018 8:21 AM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

he's a Gambit if there ever was one

Too bad there'll never be an American Flagg movie, since he pretty much nailed Reuben by playing Raylan.

Ah well, I'm sure he'll relish his four lines in the new Tarantino.

I think Olyphant in devil-may-care mode is A+ but I think his Tony Stark would be necessarily extremely different. He has an old school movie star charisma that was finally deployed to perfection in Justified, it’s kind of shameful it took that long.

Eventually they will have to recast everyone- a practice I’m not opposed to at all, as it fits the source material perfectly.

btw i don't really think Iron Man 2 is a completely terrible film, but it seems to be a failed attempt at recapturing a bit of what made the first one good and generally speaking there's not much interesting about Mickey Rourke's character despite at the Methoding he was doing, and it was probably the worst bit of casting in the series that i've seen thus far. And i think it was a film that showed a very bad path the series could have taken, one that was more unadventurous and coasting on goodwill. Favreau ran out of ideas.