This is gonna come off as dickish but shouldn't everyone know by now people are giving their opinions? It seems quite obvious.
It depends on what they say.
"Thor Ragnarok is a bad movie" is an opinion.
"Thor Ragnarok is a failure" implies an objective standard and it is easily disproven by box office totals and critical consensus.
"All true fans know that Thor Ragnarok is a bad movie" is just a dickish thing to say.
So another question this film brings to mind, will Thor avenge himself on the Gamemaster? I know he helped kickstart the revolution that toppled him, but it's hard for me to imagine Thor not wanting a face to face after everything he went through on Sakaar.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4341&p=.htm
"To go along with the film's "A" CinemaScore, opening weekend audiences were 56% male vs. 44% female, and of the overall audience, 63% were over the age of 25. One sign Disney and Marvel has to enjoy, beyond the fact Ragnarok debuted with $35+ million more than Thor: The Dark World, is audience demos were closer to a 50/50 split than its predecessor, whose opening weekend audience was 62% male. "
Interesting.
I think this movie demonstrates the effectiveness of simplicity when properly executed. Yes, the plot is fairly straightforward, and I had a blast coasting through it. The characters were fun and interesting, the action was fantastic, and—having seen it three times now—it's refreshing on subsequent views. It has its flaws, of course. One thing that worked against it was having, in my opinion, two competing storylines: Thor’s adventures on Sakaar vs. Hela’s reign of terror on Asgard. The former would’ve made for an interesting feature in itself; the latter relied too much on the former’s conclusion. Personally, it wasn’t difficult to enjoy both. Transitioning from one the other didn’t disrupt my viewing enjoyment. But one had great character development while giving us exciting new possibilities; the other had that but in a lesser extent, and it relied too heavily on Cate Blanchett’s incredible acting (who better return someday!).
Overall, Thor: Ragnarok was an amalgamation of everything right about the MCU. It epitomizes Marvel’s winning formula in a spectacularly entertaining way.
I really enjoyed the film, but I did think that combining the two storylines was a mistake: the Sakaar storyline was so much fun and had such energy that I loved every minute, whereas the Hela/Asgard stuff was neither serious enough to have any impact, or funny/entertaining enough to keep that good feeling going from the Sakaar scenes; basically as we got off Sakaar the movie ran out of energy for me, and it felt like being at a party which had gone on for too long and where you were beginning to sober up. The Sakaar storyline is like a big, fun, caper movie, and I think it would have benefited from ending on a fun high rather than muddying things up on Asgard. None of the Asgard scenes were as fun or as exciting as the arena stuff, with Thor vs Hela being that much less exciting than Thor vs the Hulk, which was the combat highlight for me.
Anyway, definitely a film I'm looking forward to watching again. I hope they let Hemsworth off the leash a bit in the Avengers movies, because he's just so good here I want to see more of that Thor.
Except neither of those two films worked as well as T:R (imo). Ragnarok had its flaws, but on the whole it delivered a really fun ride.
It helps that this film took Planet Hulk, which I've never read and therefore have no love for, and adapted it to its own (rather comedic) ends, rather than screwing over Simonson material; I got a bit frustrated at previous Thor films that used just enough Simonson material to prevent proper future adaptations from happening, at least until a reboot. This one only cheapened the Executioner's greatest moment, which admittedly did annoy me a lot.