What would the Marvel Cinematic Universe look like if...?

[King of Asgard]

...Tom Hiddelston had been given the role of Thor? Since it is almost universally recognised that Chris Hemsworth is a terrible Thor, I was wondering if, in an alternate universe, Hiddelston had been given the role of Thor instead of Loki, would the Thor movies be less dreadful? The fact that Hiddelston is a far better actor than Hemsworth would make me think that they would be. Surely he couldn't do any worse than the jack-booted Australian. Would Hiddelston be more charismatic? Would he have at least some chemistry with Portman? Who do you think would get the role of Loki in this universe?

[Arvandor]

...Tom Hiddelston had been given the role of Thor? Since it is almost universally recognised that Chris Hemsworth is a terrible Thor, I was wondering if, in an alternate universe, Hiddelston had been given the role of Thor instead of Loki, would the Thor movies be less dreadful? The fact that Hiddelston is a far better actor than Hemsworth would make me think that they would be. Surely he couldn't do any worse than the jack-booted Australian. Would Hiddelston be more charismatic? Would he have at least some chemistry with Portman? Who do you think would get the role of Loki in this universe?

What universe is this where Hemsworth is a terrible Thor? Most of the complaints about the films I've heard about focus on the script, the humour, and Natalie Portman. I've never before read complaints about Hemsworth himself.

[Vidocq]

...Tom Hiddelston had been given the role of Thor?

You'd have a an awfully skinny and miscast Thor...

Since it is almost universally recognised that Chris Hemsworth is a terrible Thor,...

Is it? I think he is pretty good in the role. Not mind blowing but it isn't King Lear or anything.

I was wondering if, in an alternate universe, Hiddelston had been given the role of Thor instead of Loki, would the Thor movies be less dreadful?

... Are they? I mean, I don't like Thor 2, it's the worse of the MCU films but it has nothing to do on the acting and everything to do with the comedic direction and the over used comedic relief character. Even then I wouldn't call them dreadful.

The fact that Hiddelston is a far better actor than Hemsworth would make me think that they would be.

And Anthony Hopkins is a far better actor than both of them and he wouldn't do any better in either part than what he did as Odin.

Surely he couldn't do any worse than the jack-booted Australian.
Would Hiddelston be more charismatic?
Would he have at least some chemistry with Portman?
Who do you think would get the role of Loki in this universe?

He would do so much worse.
Nope.
I think Hensworth and her have good chemistry, considering their relationship so far is based almost purely in lust and there is no doubt that they actually do lust for each other in real life (have you seen those abs? Goddamn! It's like they were genetically modified to prove the Kinsey scale theory on sexuality). But maybe? I don't know, you'll have to sell that she is just smitten by him on first contact.
Someone far less suited for the role than Hiddleston.

[Vidocq]

What universe is this where Hemsworth is a terrible Thor? Most of the complaints about the films I've heard about focus on the script, the humour, and Natalie Portman. I've never before read complaints about Hemsworth himself.

And really, I think that the complaints on Natalie Portman steam more from the comedic role she was given, she would probably do something far better (and she has) with a better script.

[Coin Biter]

Hemsworth is universally acknowledged to be a terrible Thor, in much the same sense that Evans is universally acknowledged to be a terrible Cap or Johansson to be a terrible Black Widow. Which is to say, not at all All of these actors are good enough in their roles; the Cap films are simply.... better. There are some (rare) cases where superhero films are undermined by terrible casting; usually it's uninspired writing.

In short, Hemsworth being recast in favour of an actor who you prefer would not transfer the fun but average Thor films into flawless masterpieces. (My own actor preferences would involve recasting Anthony Hopkins, but I'm not going to contend that would really transform the films that much.) Hemsworth at least looks the part, which Tom Hiddleston would not.

So far as Hiddleston is concerned, incidentally, he may or may not be a better actor than Hemsworth; I think it's often easier to impress as a complicated and charismatic villain in these kind of films than as a relatively more straightforward hero.

[Vworp Vworp]

Since it is almost universally recognised that Chris Hemsworth is a terrible Thor...

And by 'almost' you mean 'not at all', yes?

...the Cap films are simply.... better.

Cap 2, yes. Cap 1, no.

[Michael24]

The Cap films are definitely the best of the MCU. First Cap 1 (fantastic), then Cap 2 (good). But Scarlett is pretty dreadful as Black Widow. She's a horrible actress whose "performances" seriously lack emotion. Every line she delivered in Cap 2 landed with a dull thud. Just listen to "I only pretend to know everything." Ugh. Makes me cringe.

As for the Thor movies, I think Hiddlestone would have been seriously miscast. Chris Hemsworth is a great Thor. While the first one is slow during the second act and has too much fish-out-of-water humor, the second one was (IMO) terrific. My biggest complaint about either, though, is Kat Dennings. Very annoying, and in the first movie her character is utterly worthless to the story.

I mean, I don't like Thor 2, it's the worse of the MCU films...

I find Iron Man 2 the absolute worst. Downey's obnoxiousness was ramped up to the max, Mickey Rourke practically did nothing the entire movie, and there's like eight minutes of action spread across two hours. It was one of the most coma-inducing movies I've ever seen.

[King of Asgard]

The Cap films are definitely the best of the MCU. First Cap 1 (fantastic), then Cap 2 (good). But Scarlett is pretty dreadful as Black Widow. She's a horrible actress whose "performances" seriously lack emotion. Every line she delivered in Cap 2 landed with a dull thud. Just listen to "I only pretend to know everything." Ugh. Makes me cringe.

As for the Thor movies, I think Hiddlestone would have been seriously miscast. Chris Hemsworth is a great Thor. While the first one is slow during the second act and has too much fish-out-of-water humor, the second one was (IMO) terrific. My biggest complaint about either, though, is Kat Dennings. Very annoying, and in the first movie her character is utterly worthless to the story.


I find Iron Man 2 the absolute worst. Downey's obnoxiousness was ramped up to the max, Mickey Rourke practically did nothing the entire movie, and there's like eight minutes of action spread across two hours. It was one of the most coma-inducing movies I've ever seen.

To be fair, it's not like Malekith did anything in Thor 2, either.

[kalorama]

Since it is almost universally recognised that Chris Hemsworth is a terrible Thor

We must live in very different universes. In the one I live in, I think that Hemsworth does a fine job as Thor and is probably underrated for his work in the films.

I find Iron Man 2 the absolute worst.

I'd probably agree. it wasn't terrible, but it was probably the least satisfying.

Cap 2, yes. Cap 1, no.

I'd say "yes" on both. I think the Cap films are the two best ones Marvel has done, with Winter Soldier being number 1 overall.

[MindofShadow]

Is this an undercover, hate Hemsworth thread?

[saul_on_the_road_to_damascus]

Hemsworth is fine as thor. He wasn't my first choice nore was hiddleston my first choice as loki but they both do good work. But yeah thor 2 was horrible.

[BigLbo]

You'd have a an awfully skinny and miscast Thor...

which you'd think would be a problem, but when i said the same about gal gadot as wonder woman i quickly learned size doesn't matter when it comes to this stuff.

anyways my only real problem with the thor movies was the mishandling of the destroyer.

[saul_on_the_road_to_damascus]

What was wrong with the Destroyer

[LASERlips]

which you'd think would be a problem, but when i said the same about gal gadot as wonder woman i quickly learned size doesn't matter when it comes to this stuff.

anyways my only real problem with the thor movies was the mishandling of the destroyer.

How did you learn this? The movie is far from being out. Is it because she hit the gym? Okay, that's fine--but I'd be much more concerned about her acting ability anyway.

With regards to OP, there is nothing wrong with Hemsworth as Thor--the problems with Thor 2 included Natalie Portman's role, and the fact that it's really a by-the-numbers generic plot. I don't think the humor is the problem so much as the humor made it palatable in the first place. Without it, it would have been even more sleep-inducing.

[Mr. Mastermind]

...Tom Hiddelston had been given the role of Thor?

There's a reason why he was cast as the smart, skinny trickster who avoids violence, not the dumb, jacked up, violent warrior.

Since it is almost universally recognised that Chris Hemsworth is a terrible Thor,

I have never heard anyone say that, other than you just now.

Hemsworth's Thor is not a deep, subtle and nuanced character because he's playing Thor, possibly the least subtle and nuanced superhero ever.

I was wondering if, in an alternate universe, Hiddelston had been given the role of Thor instead of Loki, would the Thor movies be less dreadful?

Nah, Hiddleston's Loki is the best thing about both those movies by a country mile.

which you'd think would be a problem, but when i said the same about gal gadot as wonder woman i quickly learned size doesn't matter when it comes to this stuff.

We haven't seen Gal as WW yet, so why are we using her as proof that skinny actors can work in these type of roles?

And it's much harder to find good actresses that are bulked up than it is to find good actors that are at that level.