Thor: Love And Thunder 'Here There Be Spoilers'

[Somecrazyaussie]

A camel man who dresses like Thor? You can't take that too seriously.

That's even more reason to portray Beta-Ray as more serious and noble. His design lends itself to silliness so much that audiences will go in with the mindset of not viewing him seriously. So you pull a switch and give them the opposite. They need to do it I think purely because Thor (and Korg) both need a straight man. Beta Ray can be that foil.

[Jack The Tripper]

it is not manufactured criticism, it is not even a criticism, it was just something that was easy to spot, and when you say avengers was not used to sell the movie, it would not collide well with what we factually saw in the trailer. and the end of the day, trailer are for selling movies, trailers are used to promote movies for cinema tickets, whatever we saw in the trailers was used to sell a film, and we saw the most cringe worthy avengers refences, (eternals assembles, thanos wiped out earth, who is the new leaders of the avengers) heck, this is even the reason fandango for example only start doing box office projection when the first trailer drops.

Anyone is entitled to believe what they want to beleive, however i doubt any marketing strategist or sales executive wont come to the conclusion that eternals was not using avengers as part of their sales promotions based on the trailers. Eternals Assemble???...... Really?. what is the better way to market a comic film from a new IP by using that tagline.



I allude this more to some studios not taking their IP seriously anymore that they feel they need to rest too much on homages. Homages can be a poor substitute for having not enough story to work with.



Please can you name some examples of these failed predictions usually being off base. you say this to me all the time, but never point out the failed predictions. the last thing I remember predicting here was Dune cleaning up the Oscars in the technical categories, which turned out correct. I also predicted or ''guessed'' how George Lucas directs and produces films, which turned out correct since he said what I said when he got his PGA lifetime awards. I have never claimed to be a perfect Astrologer of movies, but I always find film and film making easy to guess right many of the times. So if you think I am always predicting something that is way off, do give some past examples.



No offence, but what false claims am I repeating? Shang CHI was not stand alone, we did not really need to have a post credit scene of captain marvel and hulk. They added nothing to the movie. No need to touch much on the rest (NWH and eternals) since it has already been discussed.

Just a note on Logan, Logan is not super-dependant on any of the past films even if Logan was part of the X-Men IP. GOTG IP and Thor IP are not part of each other. Like X-Men, they are stand alone IP of marvel, so they need to have more stand alone films even more than Logan tried to be.

There is nothing wrong with interconnectivity , it only becomes an issues when the story rest way too much on it. This Thor trailer could have still had GOTG members in it but they did not need to put that in the trailer and a first trailer for that matter, because now, this is a thor movie and we are talking about GOTG as much as Thor itself. This is when interconnectivity becomes problematic in issues.

The worlds of Thor and GOTG are bleeding too much into eachother, which is making the MCU look tiny. marvel choosing this approach, yes it means more money for them but the creative narrative comes off poorly and that is the vibe this trailers gives me. I am also looking at some of the reception and reaction from comic fans and most seems to be on the been there and done that. the reception so far for this trailer has been meh to average and I feel this is fitting since we could have had something a little more different.

Honestly, this is a bit overblown. It’s just another marketing ploy to the effect of “FROM THE STUDIO THAT BOUGHT YOU AVENGERS”. It’s not a big deal, these characters inhabit the same world, you’d get more people asking why they aren’t acknowledging prior events.

Same with Thor, his last appearance led to him going off with The GOTG; not including them in this film would feel disjointed and really a missed opportunity seeing as they had some great scenes together in Infinity War. The trailer should also be given props for clearly including the majority of footage from only the first act (presumably) - it clearly sets up the GOTG to be leaving Thir quite early on, so I doubt anyone is gonna come in expecting them to be in the whole film.

It should also be noted that Thor is much higher profile now following Ragnarok and Avengers 3 and 4, so they don’t need GOTG to help market the movie. Their inclusion in the movie (and to what extent) is clearly Waititi’s choice - judging by his previous films, I’m sure he was delighted to write for them.

[Jack The Tripper]

And yet it's high art I am too much of a peasant to get when Snyder uses Hallelujah in that Justice League movie.

Whatever. I may not agree with various directors musical preferences, like the dude who did Iron Man 3 (I thought AC/DC was great in the first 2 movies, but that rap song at the beginning of IM3 kind of threw me), but that doesn't mean they don't serve the story well. (I didn't like the IM3 *story* much, either. So the song choice was apparently 100% on-brand.)

Wasn’t that song Blue by Eiffel 65? For a millennium eve party? I think it fits so so well for 31st December 1999, regardless of the song’s quality!

[Somecrazyaussie]

It should also be noted that Thor is much higher profile now following Ragnarok and Avengers 3 and 4, so they don’t need GOTG to help market the movie. Their inclusion in the movie (and to what extent) is clearly Waititi’s choice - judging by his previous films, I’m sure he was delighted to write for them.

I don't think they'll be in the film long. Purely because James Gunn has control over them to the point he scripted/advised their parts in Avengers 3 and 4. They'll likely pop up and be gone within the first 10 minutes of the movie.

[Username taken]

Don't forget also that Black Widow had Nirvana

I feel it is time comic films just stop with all the songs in the trailers including DC. Have we reached the point where we can call a trailer ''generic'' just for the reason, it had a popular song. the Aerosmith song for this trailer is indeed generic usage of a song in a trailer.

I don't remember much of the comic trailers in the early 2000s, but I doubt they used songs. geesh, studios need to give it a rest people. They are stereotyping the superhero genre way too much by always using rock/pop songs.

Aerosmith?

[Jack The Tripper]

I hate that song, but the lyrics are actually very apt for Thor - lyrics about thunder and other stuff (I can’t name anything else but a lot of trailer breakdowns have noted it)

[Frontier]

I don't think they'll be in the film long. Purely because James Gunn has control over them to the point he scripted/advised their parts in Avengers 3 and 4. They'll likely pop up and be gone within the first 10 minutes of the movie.

Yeah, I think that scene of them in the trailer is about the gist of their involvement in the movie.

[HollowSage]

There is nothing wrong with interconnectivity , it only becomes an issues when the story rest way too much on it. This Thor trailer could have still had GOTG members in it but they did not need to put that in the trailer and a first trailer for that matter, because now, this is a thor movie and we are talking about GOTG as much as Thor itself. This is when interconnectivity becomes problematic in issues. .

There IS nothing wrong with inter connectivity because that is the point of a shared universe. That is what the MCU is built on and it’s what the majority of fans want. One of the main complaints fans had about Agents of Shield and the Netflix shows was how they felt disconnected from the MCU. The Disney plus shows are much more integrated as a result.

Perhaps this is a problem for you and you want something different. That’s fine and there are plenty of studios making stand alone films, in fact despite many attempts by others Marvel is really the only one doing it consistently and successfully.

We are 24 movies deep into the MCU with no signs of slowing down. The MCU is what it is. Maybe it’s just not for you and that’s ok. I mean I don’t like romantic comedies but I know that some people do and it’s cool they have movies they like to watch even if I don’t.

[Sutekh]

I hate that song, but the lyrics are actually very apt for Thor - lyrics about thunder and other stuff (I can’t name anything else but a lot of trailer breakdowns have noted it)

Man, I just remembered the use of a song in a superhero movie I *did* find jarring. That cover of Toto's Africa during the African desert scene in Aquaman. So, so, extra. With a drive-by of non-specific cringe.

[Castle]

Aerosmith?

oh sorry , that would be Gun and Roses. I have always mixed both bands up because Axl Rose and Steven Tyler sounded too alike.

Honestly, this is a bit overblown. It’s just another marketing ploy to the effect of “FROM THE STUDIO THAT BOUGHT YOU AVENGERS”. It’s not a big deal, these characters inhabit the same world, you’d get more people asking why they aren’t acknowledging prior events.

.

I don't think it was overblown. I do remember the reaction even on the eternals thread here, although I just think this topic should just be put to rest. marvel tried to sell eternals on avengers backbone and it did not work well. so I am just going to leave it as that.

Same with Thor, his last appearance led to him going off with The GOTG; not including them in this film would feel disjointed and really a missed opportunity seeing as they had some great scenes together in Infinity War. The trailer should also be given props for clearly including the majority of footage from only the first act (presumably) - it clearly sets up the GOTG to be leaving Thir quite early on, so I doubt anyone is gonna come in expecting them to be in the whole film.

Maybe I am thinking a little too deep, but I always felt part of the reason RDJ, Chris Evans and Scar Jo retired from their roles is that they wanted marvel to start standing on their own feet with their respective IPs. RDJ, Chris, Scarlet laid all the right foundations. Some used to say ,MCU would not survive without RDJ and it looks like, maybe MCU believes that subconsciously. The only alternative is now to make many of their films have a cross over of two main marvel IPS, to keep interest and keep the box office flowing.

Also to be fair, this was not the onset of their cinematic universe, phase 1 was fine with bold solo self contained films , with cross over baits in the film been more about building to Avengers. Once upon a time, there was a reason why Civil War, Avengers 2012 and Infinity Wars were meant to be different films than Thor the dark world, GOTG or iron man 3, even within the MCU, but now that difference is shrinking. due to the crossover for the sake of it.

It should also be noted that Thor is much higher profile now following Ragnarok and Avengers 3 and 4, so they donÂ’t need GOTG to help market the movie. Their inclusion in the movie (and to what extent) is clearly WaititiÂ’s choice - judging by his previous films, IÂ’m sure he was delighted to write for them.

Yes, Thor has a higher profile as I cited already , him been part of the original Avengers. he does not need GOTG to market his films, at least on a paper and on technicality but marvel studious , I feel thinks, GOTG must be Thor's safety net for Thor 4 as Hulk was for Thor 3. It is like they dont trust their own film making and authenticity of character and world building arcs to sell just Thor, when he is not doing Avengers stiff. Thor 3 did not really need Hulk, (Another main marvel IP) , so why repeat that again but this time with GOTG?

Thor has a high profile enough to get a self contained movie, but Marvel does not feel confident enough, for I think many reasons. The fact that the last self contained solo film was in 2013, does not really give the character the best profile on practicality, which I feel needs to be called out because Thor (ignoring the xmen/ spiderman sub-universe of marvel) Thor has the one of the richest world in marvel, even richer than Wakanda so you can explore thor's world and not need GOTG or Hulk to show up in major roles.

As a person who has quite a soft spot for Thor 1. I , given a choice will chose more of a self contained Thor film than the alternate of guest stars. No reason for that, when there are more Avengers movies, where they will get to see eachother anyway.

[inisideguy]

Don't forget also that Black Widow had Nirvana

I feel it is time comic films just stop with all the songs in the trailers including DC. Have we reached the point where we can call a trailer ''generic'' just for the reason, it had a popular song. the Aerosmith song for this trailer is indeed generic usage of a song in a trailer.

I don't remember much of the comic trailers in the early 2000s, but I doubt they used songs. geesh, studios need to give it a rest people. They are stereotyping the superhero genre way too much by always using rock/pop songs.

Ok I will bite on this. How is using a song in a teaser or a trailer stereotyping the superhero genre.

[WebLurker]

it is not manufactured criticism, it is not even a criticism, it was just something that was easy to spot, and when you say avengers was not used to sell the movie, it would not collide well with what we factually saw in the trailer. and the end of the day, trailer are for selling movies, trailers are used to promote movies for cinema tickets, whatever we saw in the trailers was used to sell a film, and we saw the most cringe worthy avengers refences, (eternals assembles, thanos wiped out earth, who is the new leaders of the avengers) heck, this is even the reason fandango for example only start doing box office projection when the first trailer drops.

Anyone is entitled to believe what they want to beleive, however i doubt any marketing strategist or sales executive wont come to the conclusion that eternals was not using avengers as part of their sales promotions based on the trailers. Eternals Assemble???...... Really?. what is the better way to market a comic film from a new IP by using that tagline.

The fact that you had to cherry-pick four examples from the overall marketing campaign (which, as noted before, was most heavily focused on the fact that Chloé Zhao was directing, the new characters themselves, etc.) shows just just how unfounded your criticism is. Heck, the only way you could make it work is if you twist things so that marketing it as the latest MCU movie is somehow selling it on the backs of the Avengers, and that's such a stretch we need not even consider it.

(You also missed how the few references were used; a couple were throwaway jokes and the other two helped explain where the movie fit into the larger series. That's not selling it off the other properties.)

I allude this more to some studios not taking their IP seriously anymore that they feel they need to rest too much on homages. Homages can be a poor substitute for having not enough story to work with.

The problem is is that you never examine if they do, but just write them off as being bad automatically. Heck, you've failed to explain how the MCU's use of homages and crossovers is ruining the series (beyond your whining "I don't want Guardians in my Thor because of reasons").

Please can you name some examples of these failed predictions usually being off base.

Let's see, the MCU using a formula, directors not being given creative freedom in their movies, that Eternals would look just like the other movies in the series and we wouldn't see Zhao's fingerprints over it. Need I go on?

No offence, but what false claims am I repeating?

The MCU formula for one. You really need to get off of that misconception.

Shang CHI was not stand alone, we did not really need to have a post credit scene of captain marvel and hulk. They added nothing to the movie. No need to touch much on the rest (NWH and eternals) since it has already been discussed.

An extra scene separated from the main narrative doesn't need to directly affect the actual film (unlike how the Knightmare scene in BvS contributed nothing to its story). Why do you think it's separated from the main movie and not in the main film itself?

Heck, that Shang-Chi scene had more relevance than the extended wasteland scene at the end of the Snyder Cut did; at least the Shang-Chi one was creating connective tissue between the overall MCU series. Since the Snyder Cut was the conclusion to the Snyderverse series (something everyone knew from the beginning), that extra scene hangs as an unresolved cliffhanger, upends the actual ending of the movie/series, and tries to set up unmade movies that are never

Just a note on Logan, Logan is not super-dependant on any of the past films even if Logan was part of the X-Men IP. GOTG IP and Thor IP are not part of each other. Like X-Men, they are stand alone IP of marvel, so they need to have more stand alone films even more than Logan tried to be.

Since the MCU is a singular whole, that claim would be false (heck, that is the exact point of the series; all these characters co-exist and can have adventures together if the Powers That Be have a story to tell). Also, as stated before, Logan is as connected to the X-Men movies as most of the MCU movies are to each other. The only difference is that you like Logan better, therefore it's okay that they do something you otherwise hate in Marvel Studios.

There is nothing wrong with interconnectivity , it only becomes an issues when the story rest way too much on it. This Thor trailer could have still had GOTG members in it but they did not need to put that in the trailer and a first trailer for that matter, because now, this is a thor movie and we are talking about GOTG as much as Thor itself. This is when interconnectivity becomes problematic in issues.

Translation: I don't want to see the Guardians in my Thor movie, therefore it's objectively bad.

That's a terrible argument, if one can even call it an argument in the first place. Besides, the Guardians themselves are a pretty small part of the trailer, with most of the focus being on Thor and his situation. In any event, since the Guardians are going to be in the movie, so it's logical to show that.

The worlds of Thor and GOTG are bleeding too much into eachother, which is making the MCU look tiny.

And yet the series as a whole is expanding in different directions with the current and upcoming projects.

marvel choosing this approach, yes it means more money for them but the creative narrative comes off poorly and that is the vibe this trailers gives me. I am also looking at some of the reception and reaction from comic fans and most seems to be on the been there and done that. the reception so far for this trailer has been meh to average and I feel this is fitting since we could have had something a little more different.

It's not the most exciting trailer, fair, but it is just a teaser trailer. More is coming that will show us more details.

[Castle]

Ok I will bite on this. How is using a song in a teaser or a trailer stereotyping the superhero genre.

Because when everyone does the same thing, the...a stereotype is born. This stuff has been going on for a while. I actually thought the rock song thing for comic films will peak when DC used Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody for the Suicide Squad film, that was huge back then, the SS Trailer still ranks as one of the best comic book trailers of all time. although I thought the actual movie was pretty meh. one of the worst fate in films is when a movie trailer is superior to the actual movie itself and that was the case with Suicide Squad.

However, since then , it is been some popular song for comic book trailers. Sweet child of mine here used for love and thunder gave me too much sugar rush though , I think all the colours and rainbows of the trailer added to that. it's feels all too much.

[inisideguy]

Because when everyone does the same thing, the...a stereotype is born. This stuff has been going on for a while. I actually thought the rock song thing for comic films will peak when DC used Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody for the Suicide Squad film, that was huge back then, the SS Trailer still ranks as one of the best comic book trailers of all time. although thought the actual movie was pretty meh. one of the worst fate in films is when a movie trailer is superior to the actual movie itself and that was the case with Suicide Squad.

However, since then , it is been some popular song for comic book trailers. Sweet child of mine here used for love and thunder gave me too much sugar rush though , I think all the colours and rainbows of the trailer added to that. it's feels all too much.

I don't understand what you are talking about. I think this is above my pay grade.

[numberthirty]

Because when everyone does the same thing, the...a stereotype is born. This stuff has been going on for a while. I actually thought the rock song thing for comic films will peak when DC used Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody for the Suicide Squad film, that was huge back then, the SS Trailer still ranks as one of the best comic book trailers of all time. although thought the actual movie was pretty meh. one of the worst fate in films is when a movie trailer is superior to the actual movie itself and that was the case with Suicide Squad.

However, since then , it is been some popular song for comic book trailers. Sweet child of mine here used for love and thunder gave me too much sugar rush though , I think all the colours and rainbows of the trailer added to that. it's feels all too much.

Politely?

The use of "Bohemian Rhapsody" in that trailer has nothing to do with the fact that some "Comic Book..." films are using rock tunes in trailers these days.