Why is Thor: The Dark World universally considered to be the worst MCU film?

Nothing really memorable about it, kind of a blur. The Destroyer shoulda been awesome but I can't really think of anything he did.

I disliked the sudden and unexplained transition from Asgard as a mystical realm to a World Of Gor science fantasy realm. But it wasn't my least favorite Marvel movie. GotG 2... until I actually watched it the second time I forgot that Kurt Russell plays a major role in that movie, and he's one of my favorite actors.

I knew it was in trouble when the henchman villain Kurse was better than the main villain Malekith. The way the dark elves were handled as a whole was pretty bad. I HATED how much screen time Darcy got. Her character was good in Thor 1, but they triple downed on her and made her character annoying as hell in 2.

The MCU are pretty good overall. Most films are a decent 7 out of 10. Thor the Dark World is just meh. I liked it the first time but I'm not gonna rewatch it anytime soon.

Thor didn't get interesting for me till Ragnarok. Before he's alright but works better as a supporting player. His brother stole the spotlight.

[QUOTE=Hellion;5581440]Pretty much what the title says. I've consistently seen [I]Thor: The Dark World[/I] ranked among the worst, if not ranked as [I]the[/I] worst, of the MCU film entries. But I've never really gotten a consensus on why people think that. I know the film had a troubled production and that the director, Alan Taylor, did not enjoy the "collaborative" process with MARVEL at all. I think the film's tone is all over the place, but that's a criticism shared by the much more successful and beloved [I]Thor: Ragnarok[/I] too. Jane Foster was kind of the weakest link, but in the early MCU films, the only romantic relationship I thought was written well was Tony/Pepper.

Personally I thought [I]Thor: The Dark World[/I] was an improvement on the first Thor film. It's by no means perfect, but I enjoyed it. We got to see a little more of the 9 realms, we spent a lot more time in Asgard, Loki got some good character development, the visuals and production looked good, etc. A lot of people say Malekith was an underwhelming or underdeveloped villain but he was still miles ahead of Yellowjacket in the first Ant-Man.

But enough about my thoughts, I wanna hear yours.[/QUOTE]

I don't think it is considered the worst though perhaps boring and suffering from a villain with no personality.

I think it is considered to be a candidate for the worst though not necessarily the winner.

The main problem with the MCU Thor is that he really isn't comic Thor. He is comic Hercules. Seriously you look at every Thor appearance and sub in comic Herc and it all plays so much better.

It really doesn't.
I don't see how subbing in Hercules does anything for Thor and Loki's relationship, Thor's relationship with Jane and the Avengers, the issues he was having in Infinity War and Endgame

[QUOTE=green_garnish;5582054]I disliked the sudden and unexplained transition from Asgard as a mystical realm to a World Of Gor science fantasy realm. But it wasn't my least favorite Marvel movie. GotG 2... until I actually watched it the second time I forgot that Kurt Russell plays a major role in that movie, and he's one of my favorite actors.[/QUOTE]

I feel like Asgard should've remained a pocket dimension and not become another planet

A little wittle pocket dimension kind of goes against the whole point of imperialism and conquering the nine realms.

I thought the first Thor was better. The fish out of water aspect when Thor was on Earth was funny and entertaining. World building was solid. Loki was a great villain. There was a proper story and story arc about Thor learning humility and becoming worthy. Good stuff.

The second film on the other hand feels like a blur. Was there a central theme to the story? A story other then the final boss. Malekith is one of the worst villains, if not the worst villain of MCU. This was some ancient evil who wants to destroy everything. Some infinity stone. Jane's life was in danger. Only Loki changed a bit. The death of their mother made him change his evil ways and he helped Thor. There was some good final battle action involving portals. And that's about it.


Personal stories are much more entertaining and memorable. The first Guardians was about a bunch of misfits finding friendship and family together. The first Avengers was great because the heroes clashed and fell apart even before they started. Only at the end they got together due to death of Coulson and Nick Fury. The final invasion was like the party when they had finally banded together. The movie however was about how uniquely different and talented people had to overcome their differences and band together.

Compare thst with Whedon's Justice League. The conflict is Steppenwolf and his world ending danger. Even if a few were reluctant to join initially they didn't have much problem banding together. By the middle of the movie they were already together. The film has a number of problems. But the biggest one is the film doesn't have a conflict or story other then that a world ending scenario is coming. And they have to unite to stop it.

Even if there were a few stories like Loki's change of heart or Thor pining for Jane, the film is quite muddled as a whole. The only thing i like about that is that Loki and Thor are fun to watch together. That's the saving grace which makes the movie entertaining. Its a decent movie. Better then Captain Marvel imo. But i would rather watch Incredible Hulk then this.

[QUOTE=Tofali;5582311]A little wittle pocket dimension kind of goes against the whole of point of imperialism and conquering the nine realms.[/QUOTE]

Wouldn't all the realms be their own pocket dimension?

[QUOTE=Soubhagya;5582385]I thought the first Thor was better. The fish out of water aspect when Thor was on Earth was funny and entertaining. World building was solid. Loki was a great villain. There was a proper story and story arc about Thor learning humility and becoming worthy. Good stuff.

The second film on the other hand feels like a blur. Was there a central theme to the story? A story other then the final boss. Malekith is one of the worst villains, if not the worst villain of MCU. This was some ancient evil who wants to destroy everything. Some infinity stone. Jane's life was in danger. Only Loki changed a bit. The death of their mother made him change his evil ways and he helped Thor. There was some good final battle action involving portals. And that's about it.


Personal stories are much more entertaining and memorable. The first Guardians was about a bunch of misfits finding friendship and family together. The first Avengers was great because the heroes clashed and fell apart even before they started. Only at the end they got together due to death of Coulson and Nick Fury. The final invasion was like the party when they had finally banded together. The movie however was about how uniquely different and talented people had to overcome their differences and band together.

Compare thst with Whedon's Justice League. The conflict is Steppenwolf and his world ending danger. Even if a few were reluctant to join initially they didn't have much problem banding together. By the middle of the movie they were already together. The film has a number of problems. But the biggest one is the film doesn't have a conflict or story other then that a world ending scenario is coming. And they have to unite to stop it.

Even if there were a few stories like Loki's change of heart or Thor pining for Jane, the film is quite muddled as a whole. The only thing i like about that is that Loki and Thor are fun to watch together. That's the saving grace which makes the movie entertaining. Its a decent movie. Better then Captain Marvel imo. But i would rather watch Incredible Hulk then this.[/QUOTE]

Maybe it would've been a more interesting movie if we saw the heroes actually using the Reality stone for something.

[QUOTE=Tofali;5581978]For me so long as a movie within a shared universe tells its own story and is entertaining it has accomplish its goals. Focusing on the impact in the overall story being told in the MCU is a recipe for disaster. There are many MCU movies that tell stories that have no impact beyond the confines of its own franchise.[/QUOTE]

I see your point, but TDW presented changes that didn't even matter within its own franchise.

[QUOTE=DrNewGod;5583042]I see your point, but TDW presented changes that didn't even matter within its own franchise.[/QUOTE]

I'm glad Loki becoming King of Asgard was unexplored and Marvel chose to center the movie on the glory of Herc-Thor :cool:

[QUOTE=Tofali;5583082]I'm glad Loki becoming King of Asgard was unexplored and Marvel chose to center the movie on the glory of Herc-Thor :cool:[/QUOTE]

Glad you enjoyed it. Not my cuppa. :)