Thor Ragnarok Review

[k von doom]

I'm surprised that when Thor started channelling lightning during the arena fight against Hulk, that the electroshock device on his neck wasn't destroyed. That thing must have been insulated af.

In light of the fact that Mjolnir wasn't the source of Thor's power, does that mean he should have remained powerful all along during Thor 1?

[hulahulk]

I'm surprised that when Thor started channelling lightning during the arena fight against Hulk, that the electroshock device on his neck wasn't destroyed. That thing must have been insulated af.

In light of the fact that Mjolnir wasn't the source of Thor's power, does that mean he should have remained powerful all along during Thor 1?

2 very good points.

The shock device thing didn't bother me as much as the point about Mjolnir. For that, I tried to come up with a good reason. I'm guessing that since Thor did not realize his potential, he couldn't tap into it.

[OceanStar]

I'm glad I skipped this & waiting for JLA/Black Panther.

BTW: Thank GOD I have my Thor comics

[Totoro Man]

I'm surprised that when Thor started channelling lightning during the arena fight against Hulk, that the electroshock device on his neck wasn't destroyed. That thing must have been insulated af.

In light of the fact that Mjolnir wasn't the source of Thor's power, does that mean he should have remained powerful all along during Thor 1?

not really: Odin stripped Thor of his powers and banished him from Asgaard because he believed that Thor was no longer worthy of such gifts. once Thor proves himself worthy he gets them back quickly. the biggest difference would have been in how he manifested his power.

(I dunno... maybe I am misremembering what happened in the first Thor film seeing as how I only saw it once when it first came out in theaters)

[Jabare]

Finally a good Thor movie.

the first one was awful. The second had promise but was overall just meh.


This was a well paced enjoyable movie throughout. Granted they made some big changes to Thor's character. I'm honestly surprised

[tabo61]

Awesome movie. Hela destroying Mjolnir is definitely one of the shocking moments in the MCU movies no doubt.

[Panic]

not really: Odin stripped Thor of his powers and banished him from Asgaard because he believed that Thor was no longer worthy of such gifts. once Thor proves himself worthy he gets them back quickly. the biggest difference would have been in how he manifested his power.

(I dunno... maybe I am misremembering what happened in the first Thor film seeing as how I only saw it once when it first came out in theaters)

No, you're pretty much right. Odin makes Thor mortal and powerless (and that includes no super-human physical attributes as well as lightning powers), but puts the key to regaining that power in the hammer. Thor's strength and durability was never supposed to come from the hammer - in the comics it simply switched Thor between the mortal body of Don Blake and his real Asgardian body, but the film makes it more difficult to understand by simply making Thor human and powerless rather than giving him a different body/identity; regardless, Thor's superhuman strength never came from the hammer, whilst the lightning powers the comics have always been a little confused over whether they were Mjolnir's enchantment or simply Thor's abilities focussed through the hammer.

[hulahulk]

not really: Odin stripped Thor of his powers and banished him from Asgaard because he believed that Thor was no longer worthy of such gifts. once Thor proves himself worthy he gets them back quickly. the biggest difference would have been in how he manifested his power.

(I dunno... maybe I am misremembering what happened in the first Thor film seeing as how I only saw it once when it first came out in theaters)

Yeah this is way better than what I said

[gwangung]

Well, one thing’s for sure. Comic fans have absolutely no clue about drama. All this nattering about action vs. comedy just proves that in spades.

Story/character/arc. That’s it. Every good story has a mix of comedy and drama. Season to taste.

[motherofpearl1]

I'm glad I skipped this & waiting for JLA/Black Panther.

BTW: Thank GOD I have my Thor comics :)

Im currently enjoying fan fiction believe it or not!

[Sammael]

Out of curiosity, regarding Surtur... if he is allowed to run free... what is the end game? melt all that he sees until nothing is left of the land but cosmic soup floating in space?

[JKtheMac]

The climax of the film also fell victim to what I thought was one of the major failings of Wonder Woman. The hero didn't defeat the villain thanks to some plot development that had been foreshadowed earlier in the film, or e3ven thanks to a mistake of the villain's. The hero just got stronger for no discernible reason, and gained powers not previously hinted at. Instead of losing to a villain who clearly had dominating force over them, they just inexplicably started winning. It was emotionless and lazy. And uninspiring. Huge letdown. For me it was easily the worst Thor movie. Easily the worst Marvel movie. I'll never watch a Marvel flick from this director again, I think.

Have you ever considered when you draw such conclusions you may have missed something? Like in this case a "plot development that had been foreshadowed earlier in the film" which was literally telegraphed at three points in the movie.

The lasso is another good example, but in both cases they just started suddenly doing things that there was no previous indication they could do.

In both cases you were clearly not paying attention.

Yes, in the last 10 minutes

Hang on I am begging to see a pattern. What are your attitudes to 'exposition'?

I wouldn't have a problem with it if the script had hinted at it earlier, making it a natural plot progression. But they just sort of thrust it in there with no warning. It's bad storytelling.

There we are. 'Bad storytelling.' Knew it was coming.

Consider this - what would they have had to have done for you to consider it good storytelling? Would that have been 'make it clearer to the general aufpdience' or just 'make it clearer to you' in some way? In a way that you recognise as 'good storytelling'.

I suspect what you actually want is for the storytelling to conform to your own notions of story and structure, with a specific set of literary devices you approve of personally. If you do this with stories, you will always be disappointed because what you are doing is undermining your own enjoyment based upon your own internal value system. You have a choice. Let go of these artificial constructs you have created, or find frustration in a huge proportion of art.

[JKtheMac]

Well, one thing’s for sure. Comic fans have absolutely no clue about drama. All this nattering about action vs. comedy just proves that in spades.

Story/character/arc. That’s it. Every good story has a mix of comedy and drama. Season to taste.

What we are discussing is not the definition of comedy on some rarified level, but how the movie would be categorised by most people in most circumstances. If we want to use the Greek definition then comedy is just having a happy resolution as opposed to a cathartic negative resolution. The more modern assumption has much more to do with the general intent of the work. Does the person making the work intend it to be funny or induce laughter.

It is reasonably obvious the intent of the script is mostly dramatic, has a serious point and a dramatic through line. It is also very obvious that the intent of the director was to 'play it for laughs'. The whole approach, dictated by the director and the editing, was to make the audience laugh every few minutes. The method chosen was to allow improvisation and an exploration of each scene, to find humour in everything. That is a comedic instinct from a comedy director. He appears to have been chosen to do this, and the movie clearly satisfied the producers. So ultimately the person with the biggest influence on this movie changed the intent of the script and turned it from a structure designed to deliver dramatic beats into one primarily designed to deliver jokes.

Take for example the final fate of Asgard. The moment was undercut by the director himself, playing Korg, making a joke that relied upon timing the dramatic beat in such a way that it allows a punchline. So one of the biggest dramatic beats of the movie became a comedic one instead. A line that was clearly not in the script. With a number of key instances like that, 'sprinkled' through the movie by the handful, is it any wonder that we end up discussing whether this is a comedy?

[Darkseid Is]

Spider-man and Ragnarok both felt like Guardians 3. Avengers had the perfect balance for me. Guardians did it's own thing. I just hope every marvel movie isn't Guardians knock off now.

[Jokerz79]

Spider-Man Homecoming felt like a Spider-Man film to me not GOTG 2 which I also enjoyed. As for Thor Ragnarok it felt like a Taika Waititi film which makes sense he made it. My only "complaint" would be I wish there had been one moment of serious reflection on all Thor lost but I cannot call that a complaint yet because Marvel has a habit of addressing things like that in future films like they're probably be a scene in Avengers Infinity War if not then I'll complain