sol_bad
Member
Have you seen every movie on this list for starters?
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/were...r-is-it-just-nostalgia.1560195/post-259653877
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Thor: Love and Thunder ⚡ impressions thread (OPEN SPOILERS)
- Thread starter Sosokrates
- Start date
Have you seen every movie on this list for starters?
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/were...r-is-it-just-nostalgia.1560195/post-259653877
Ionian
Member
Started reading it and went yup seen that and that and that and enjoyed them. Some real classics.
Yet the author just ended up on a tirade.
So closed it, as boring.
pramod
Banned
Definitely not, I think I've seen about 70% of them.
That's why I'm focusing more on revisiting the classics these days.
Just watched The Grand Hotel Budapest a few days ago. Not a perfect movie but wow is it entertaining.
Now I need to watch:
Heat
Master and Commander
The Departed
So much stuff on the "movies to watch before you die list" that I need to watch before wasting more time on superhero shit.
Last edited:
DKehoe
Gold Member
Love Grand Budapest Hotel. If you enjoyed it check out The French Dispatch, Wes Anderson's most recent film. I still prefer Grand Budapest Hotel overall but it's a lot of fun.
pramod
Banned
One weird thing about Grand Budapest was the sheer number of A-list actors playing minor roles.. It kinda takes you out of the movie, it's like you're watching a weird alternate universe where every person is a famous actor, lol.
Last edited:
DKehoe
Gold Member
Yeh Wes Anderson's films have crazy casts. Seems like actors just love working for him. So they agree to do it for (relatively) not much pay either. I remember reading Edward Norton saying he was paid $4200 for doing Moonrise Kingdom but loves the experience of working on those films. And Bill Murray is known for being tricky to get in contact with but has said he will agree to do whatever Anderson asks him to do without even needing to know what it is.
March Climber
Member
I finally saw it today. I give it a C+ and looking back it’s a movie with a ton of awesome and great moments with good character motivations, heart warming scenes, and emotional moments. All of that sounds like it should be around an A grade but what brings it down is how it’s all put together, including Taika’s insistence to inject humor in the middle of heavy emotional moments(to the point where using a speaker to play Mary J Blige right after talking about stage 4 cancer is in extremely poor taste to the point of insulting). If this is truly what he wants to do as a creative, then he should study from the best Pixar movies and Pixar directors to understand how to do it right and make humor flow into the movie correctly, instead of inserting it in random spots to be so jarring and off putting.
I should have seen the red flags when Taika, Hemsworth, and Bale kept mentioning their kids and doing the movie for the kids in their interviews, but that doesn’t excuse it for not even being as good as a Pixar film in that case. There is nothing wrong with making a Marvel film for kids, but we have to stop treating kids like idiots who can’t handle emotional or serious moments. Those emotional moments in life are crucial because it reinforces how one should feel empathetic during them, instead of using humor as a toy-like distraction because you think they can’t handle it.
On a side note yet on topic, the fact that some parents try their hardest to make sure their kids don’t go through any of what they went through themselves, is also alarming, because they are course correcting so far in the other direction that they are hindering their children from basic things and emotions that we all should experience and they’re not even aware of that deprivation. So they end up not being able to handle it later in life and instead of being an adaptable human being, they put up walls that others have no choice but to adapt to. The movie tried to subtly convey this, yet at the same time they treated their audience in the exact opposite way. It’s head-scratchingly puzzling.
Everyone being so harsh on Thor 2 was one of the many reasons that caused this quip-acolypse rift in marvel, where every hero has to be as funny and as quippy as Spider-Man and Deadpool and now we’re stuck here(for the time being), because if you go too serious your movie ends up bad like the above or Batman V Superman, not realizing those types movies are deemed bad because of multiple reasons, not just the lack of humor. This is why DC is starting to have an upswing with movies like Joker and The Batman. They finally found the correct answer to their problems and are presenting tones that the older Marvel fans are hoping and praying that Marvel can present one day.
Also, it’s rare when I go to YouTube and look up certain reviewers, who usually have vastly different takes, all end up agreeing about this movie and it’s problems. That should be highly alarming for both Marvel and Taika. The ship is leaking and water is flooding in.
Edit: And Bale was greatest part of the movie but was too absent for too much of the movie
I should have seen the red flags when Taika, Hemsworth, and Bale kept mentioning their kids and doing the movie for the kids in their interviews, but that doesn’t excuse it for not even being as good as a Pixar film in that case. There is nothing wrong with making a Marvel film for kids, but we have to stop treating kids like idiots who can’t handle emotional or serious moments. Those emotional moments in life are crucial because it reinforces how one should feel empathetic during them, instead of using humor as a toy-like distraction because you think they can’t handle it.
On a side note yet on topic, the fact that some parents try their hardest to make sure their kids don’t go through any of what they went through themselves, is also alarming, because they are course correcting so far in the other direction that they are hindering their children from basic things and emotions that we all should experience and they’re not even aware of that deprivation. So they end up not being able to handle it later in life and instead of being an adaptable human being, they put up walls that others have no choice but to adapt to. The movie tried to subtly convey this, yet at the same time they treated their audience in the exact opposite way. It’s head-scratchingly puzzling.
Everyone being so harsh on Thor 2 was one of the many reasons that caused this quip-acolypse rift in marvel, where every hero has to be as funny and as quippy as Spider-Man and Deadpool and now we’re stuck here(for the time being), because if you go too serious your movie ends up bad like the above or Batman V Superman, not realizing those types movies are deemed bad because of multiple reasons, not just the lack of humor. This is why DC is starting to have an upswing with movies like Joker and The Batman. They finally found the correct answer to their problems and are presenting tones that the older Marvel fans are hoping and praying that Marvel can present one day.
Also, it’s rare when I go to YouTube and look up certain reviewers, who usually have vastly different takes, all end up agreeing about this movie and it’s problems. That should be highly alarming for both Marvel and Taika. The ship is leaking and water is flooding in.
Edit: And Bale was greatest part of the movie but was too absent for too much of the movie
Last edited:
Ulysses 31
Member
Doom85
Member
I love Pitch Meeting but this has to be one of their more inaccurate ones.
-unless I misunderstood something, Gorr was claiming gods only care about themselves, as in just gods and not mortals. The captured kids might have included some mortal kids who were part of families visiting New Asgard but clearly plenty of god children were among them including Heimdall’s son. So no, Gorr expecting Thor to save them is not inconsistent
-how would Thanos necessarily know about Eternity? Furthermore, would Thor know he could use Stormbreaker to get there? Even if one could argue that he could have figured out in the five years after the Blip, he was suffering from depression during that time so it shouldn’t be surprising he wasn’t thinking of possible solutions. Even when Bruce and Rocket find him, when Thor hears they have an idea to undo what Thanos has done, rather than get excited about the idea he instead focuses on them not saying Thanos’ name around him. That doesn’t sound like a man who was brainstorming ideas all this time, just saying.
-Mjolnir was draining Jane’s life because she was mortal and particularly weak at the time due to the cancer. Steve didn’t feel this effect because he only used it briefly and was obviously in a much better state health-wise.
Ulysses 31
Member
Can't argue much against that. My issue was more that for Gorr, whom had lost a child himself, this this kidnapping was a bit out of character of him but people defend it by saying it's the sword's corruption at work here.
Indeed but anyone else knowing about Eternity after Thanos did the snap would raise questions why they wouldn't organize a visit to this wish granter to undo Thanos' damage.
I think it's more the issue that Thor told Mjolnir to protect Jane and the hammer is making her health worse for her, the hammer seems to have some sentience and is going against what it's been told to. Seeing what Thor could do with the kids, one might ask if powering up Jane that way wouldn't have been better/smarter. Also, they don't really go into if Asgardian or Wakandan tech could cure the cancer.
They have certainly forgotten about the golden coffin, which was a replacement for Idunns golden apples that are what kept the gods alive and young. You'd think exploiting asgarrdian tech would be a priority for a world trying to wean itself off flawed stark tech (and I'm sure about to dive headlong into Reed tech and more pym tech) as something that can work without horrible consequences.
It's all in the wrist
Member
This movie was good. The humor was on point.
Also, tons of gay stuff. Why did Buzz Lightyear take one on the chin and this gets away unscathed lol.
Also, tons of gay stuff. Why did Buzz Lightyear take one on the chin and this gets away unscathed lol.
sol_bad
Member
I have no idea why Lightyear took any hate at all. It's gay relationship was ultimately throw away but it was done well. The relationship would have been throw away as well if it was a hetero relationship.
Last edited:
Tams
Member
While things like the Necrosword can be a deus ex machina, but honestly it seems perfectly acceptable for it to be the cause of Gorr's actions. I mean, that is what the Necrosword does; control people to achieve it's goal of slaying all gods.
As for Eternity is that many knew about her, but no one knew how to unlock access to her.
And as for Wakandan tech... well not everything in the MCU has to be brought into this. Might as well complain that Doctor Strange didn't show up. Lines have to be drawn somewhere otherwise everything could just be solved.
Ulysses 31
Member
If you keep that line of reasoning then Gorr is another victim of the sword and all the "bad" things he did with it isn't really on him. So there isn't much redemption of him at the end either when he's separated from it.
Some (vague) details about the origins of the sword could've helped mask the "deus ex machina"ness of the sword a little better.
I think Zeus has a line about Gorr not having the key to access Eternity so certainly he knew how to.
There were 4 ways to access Eternity IIRC so surely it could've been figured out sooner.
But that's the issue with world building and then later on ignoring what you've established. Not having a throw away line that they at least considered that option seems to indicate to me a lack of care for the fictional world they've made.
Redneckerz
Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
First 1.5 hours is hilarious as fuck but has little to do with Thor. Its a meme movie.
Last hour was pretty meh, so many scenes that could be played out a lot better.
Christian Bale as Gorr is pretty dope though, solid acting.
Thanks for coming to my TED Short
Last hour was pretty meh, so many scenes that could be played out a lot better.
Christian Bale as Gorr is pretty dope though, solid acting.
Thanks for coming to my TED Short
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
One was a good movie that people asked for and the other wasn't.
Alx
Member
I thought there were many issues with the movie (cookie-cutter plot with no exposition time, no character progression,...), but the bigger one is how it contradicts the message of Ragnarok. In the previous movie, Odin explained to Thor that he wasn't "the god of hammers" and that it was all about him and not his weapon. While this movie seems to be all about the weapons, the characters being useless without them. Mjolnir, Stormbringer, Necrosword or "Zeus-bolt" are driving the plot and the characters actions, it's like they're playing Diablo and looking for fat loot to improve their stats and go to the next area.
Ulysses 31
Member
Yeah, L+T had a lot of lore breaking stuff in it. Like can Thor power-up all the heroes for the next team-up? It clearly showed that non-asgaardians can receive the blessing, so is Thor a master buff dealer now? Plus I expect sentient weapons to be the next toy line, hell, probably get their own spin-off show. I know my kid LOVED the lazer eyed bunny. Broken Mjolnir is now a precision area effect weapon (if thats makes sense) as well as a massive DPS strike. What MCU battle COULDN'T it win by itself?
I wonder if the goal is to keep Hemsworths kid in the role or age the character up to a proper actress in the next film. That kid is lucky, her parents are both gorgeous but don't have any strong features that are out of place (the Willis chin, for example) on her.
I wonder if the goal is to keep Hemsworths kid in the role or age the character up to a proper actress in the next film. That kid is lucky, her parents are both gorgeous but don't have any strong features that are out of place (the Willis chin, for example) on her.
Last edited:
Ulysses 31
Member
The weaponizing of kids is also a bit disturbing if you think deeper about it, would is still be so funny and cool if any of them got fatally wounded or killed?
Last edited:
Agreed, in an era where kid on kid violence is on the rise (or at least played up by the media) Disney's choice to engage in it is a little problematic. I feel like a similar scene in an earlier era would have had some of those kids get maimed or killed if only to show that sacrifice is a thing and even a virtue. Though as aparent now I'm NOT COOL with kids getting killed as a cheap emotional ploy 'cause it works too damned well (Doctor Sleep comes to mind).
It played well to my kid for sure, but it definitely conflicts with the tone of the film (the invasion of New Asgaard was the same, these shadow things are tough....or are they?) when earths mightiest heroes can be held down by a few shadow tendrils at one moment yet slavering fanged beasts can be mowed down with virtual impunity by elementary school kids in another. Not an uncommon comic book movie problem though, to be sure, in fact it s a pretty common problem in most horror/action films in general. Bad guys are as tough as you need them to be in that scene to make the hero look good or be knocked out and captured quickly so the big bad can lay out some exposiition
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Pretty bog standard Marvel movie - it followed the formula to a T. My gripe: it was so goofy at times it bordered on parody of itself. It reminded me of the time I finally watched Star Trek V a few years back, and I couldn't tell if the creators were purposefully making it silly and campy or just didn't realize it.
Anyways, it's another Waititi Thor film. You know what you're about to get before the first frame rolls. I did think the ending was nice and touching. So Gorr's daughter is essentially the "Love" in the title.
Anyways, it's another Waititi Thor film. You know what you're about to get before the first frame rolls. I did think the ending was nice and touching. So Gorr's daughter is essentially the "Love" in the title.
sol_bad
Member
I still don't think there is anything really lore breaking in this film.
1: Why didn't Thor just put Mjilnor back together in Ragnarok?
Hela basically scared the shit out of Loki and he told Heimdell to return them to home right after Mjilnor is destroyed. Hela attacks them while travelling and they end up on Sakaar, adventure on Sakaar ensues and then the priority is to get back to Asgard asap. Thor learns that Mjilnor is just a conduit for his powers and isn't really necessary. Hela is defeated in a manner of speaking but Asgard is destroyed.
Thor decides he wants to look after his people. Low and behold they are attacked by Thanos, Thor then gets fucked up and meets the GOTG. Realises he needs some sort of weapon as he lost to Thanos without one which is why Stormbreaker is made. He could have travelled to Earth at that point but maybe Nidavellir is closer, maybe he prefers something sharp rather than blunt, maybe he wanted a new weapon that gave him access to the bifrost. Who really cares, it doesn't need to be analysed with a magnifying glass with 5 minutes of exposition.
2: Why has Thor never enchanted weapons before?
Firstly, Odin can enchant weapons, Thor being of the same bloodline, it shouldn't be surprising that he can also. Secondly, he had Zeus' lightning rod which probably strengthened his ability to enchant weapons. He never had the lightning rod prior to this. Again, I don't need an exposition dump to explain this and mess with the films pacing.
1: Why didn't Thor just put Mjilnor back together in Ragnarok?
Hela basically scared the shit out of Loki and he told Heimdell to return them to home right after Mjilnor is destroyed. Hela attacks them while travelling and they end up on Sakaar, adventure on Sakaar ensues and then the priority is to get back to Asgard asap. Thor learns that Mjilnor is just a conduit for his powers and isn't really necessary. Hela is defeated in a manner of speaking but Asgard is destroyed.
Thor decides he wants to look after his people. Low and behold they are attacked by Thanos, Thor then gets fucked up and meets the GOTG. Realises he needs some sort of weapon as he lost to Thanos without one which is why Stormbreaker is made. He could have travelled to Earth at that point but maybe Nidavellir is closer, maybe he prefers something sharp rather than blunt, maybe he wanted a new weapon that gave him access to the bifrost. Who really cares, it doesn't need to be analysed with a magnifying glass with 5 minutes of exposition.
2: Why has Thor never enchanted weapons before?
Firstly, Odin can enchant weapons, Thor being of the same bloodline, it shouldn't be surprising that he can also. Secondly, he had Zeus' lightning rod which probably strengthened his ability to enchant weapons. He never had the lightning rod prior to this. Again, I don't need an exposition dump to explain this and mess with the films pacing.
Cyberpunkd
Member
Yes, in a comic book movie genre someone will decide to start killing kids, definitely.
March Climber
Member
sol_bad
Thor enchanting a ton of weapons is character growth. I fully expect him to be able to one day reach Odin's level of strength because he is his son, and that scene solidified my expectations that he is on that path.At the same time I'm still a bit torn on him getting Storm breaker so fast because it seemed to be a slight plot regression. It's like finally unlocking Super Saiyan 2 then deciding that going back to SS1 from then on because you don't want to bother spending time training in your new form. Thor's unlocked lightning form was extremely powerful and then they instantly nerfed it one movie later. Storm breaker could have still happened later on, but he should have been training his lightning form so that grabbing SB becomes an "oh shit!" moment, like a samurai final boss suddenly pulling out a second sword.
Ulysses 31
Member
If Thor just knows no serious harm will come to the kids then sure it makes sense to give that power to them, but now you have the issue of how would Thor know that unless he read the script or Gorr is just a pushover.
I dunno, that's some fanwanking right there.
So after Hela breaks Mjolnir all the fragments end up on a little patch of grass that some asgardian takes with them on to the escape ship and never tells Thor? The fragments have no life in them at that point to call out to Thor? And why does Jane think Mjolnir can heal her? Odin uses a golden coffin, he doesn't grab his spear every now and then for some recovery power.
Odin is never shown just juicing up groups of people. It's not even hinted at, really, as a part of their battle strategy in earlier films. Yet Thor acts SO CONFIDENT that he can do this, which was never foreshadowed AT ALL.
I don't really mind this stuff happening, it's comics after all, I just wish the script used proper structure, set out some rules, and stopped relying on heretofore never revealed abilities to deal with the puppet bad guys they set up only to be ripped down. It's like this in almost EVERY SINGLE FILM, with little variation. Sure, for 5-6 films it was cool because it does work, but after DOZENS of films all kinda doing the same forumalic thing and failing to properly build-up events within a film or over a series of films (Cap weilding Mjolnir was about the only time they did this well IMHO) it wears on me because why get vested in the lore or how characters act when it can all shift in the next film at the whim of the writer? I was pumped heading into Infinity War because it really felt like a single driving intellect but now phase 4 has just been a gooey post-coital mess. Maybe looking back in a decade or so will change my opinion.
Ulysses 31
Member
There's an argument to be made for getting Stormbreaker with its teleportation, but him ignoring Mjolnir afterwards when it could be fixed so easily damages his character if he's so serious about taking on Thanos and his cronies. People who care about character development and consistency will care why Thor acted out of character when it later turns out he had powerful tools at his disposal that he didn't use.
Issue is why he hasn't done it before like say, in the Infinity Saga. Iron Man, Hulk, Black Widow and Cap with those powers could've made a big difference. This reflects badly on Thor for not using that tool he knows of in times of need. Even if he can only empower one person without Zeus' lightning, it's still foolish not to use at all against the threats he's faced before. Some people like Thor and don't like the character appearing dumber & dumber over time.
Last edited:
Ulysses 31
Member
The stakes, bro.
If you know nothing serious can happen it deflates the stakes and makes the antagonist a bit of a joke too.
It could've been cool if the kids could get hurt and seeing them coming to each others defence and help retreat the wounded. At least that way there would still be some stakes left.
Last edited:
I liked it but thought there were too many jokes. Kids getting kidnapped and they're just like "lol, you kids are the greatest and I'm super funny."
Which blows because when they got serious I was tearing up. Gorr was a great villain, though but hardly had screen time. It wasn't a bad movie and still way better than the dark world.
Which blows because when they got serious I was tearing up. Gorr was a great villain, though but hardly had screen time. It wasn't a bad movie and still way better than the dark world.
Ulysses 31
Member
Apparently a lot of Gorr was ultimately cut in the movie, a scene where he dances and also where he removes his tattoos after he stopped worshipping gods.
Gor was by far the best part of the film...I just wish he had more screentime! Also, I loved the grouchy head with hairy feet guy in the crowd.
He kinda reminded me like those little Weepuls from the '80s...only ugly and with a pissy attitude.
thismeinteil
Member
I wouldn't say the film is coming away unscathed, as it's not exactly performing well after it's initial weekend. Lightyear flopped. This has a chance to flop, as well. Ragnarok didn't have the best of legs, and L&T is dropping quicker than it.
sol_bad
Member
Ragnarok didn't have the best legs? It made 853 million with the help of China, 741 million without China.
If Love and Thunder can make more than 741 million I'd say it's in a pretty good financial situation. It has underperformed but it is far from a flop in any regard.
Domestically it's doing better than Ragnarok
Day 12 Ragnarok
Dat 12 L&T
Some countries L&T is doing better than Ragnarok, other countries it's doing worse.
Australia Ragnarok weekend 2
Australia L&T weekend 2
UK Ragnarok weekend 2
UK L&T weekend 2
*EDIT*
And lets not forget that the film has been banned in a number of other countries as well so it's be losing millions of dollars from that.
Last edited:
thismeinteil
Member
No, Ragnarok didn't have the best of legs.Ragnarok didn't have the best legs? It made 853 million with the help of China, 741 million without China.
If Love and Thunder can make more than 741 million I'd say it's in a pretty good financial situation. It has underperformed but it is far from a flop in any regard.
Domestically it's doing better than Ragnarok
Day 12 Ragnarok
Dat 12 L&T
Some countries L&T is doing better than Ragnarok, other countries it's doing worse.
Australia Ragnarok weekend 2
Australia L&T weekend 2
UK Ragnarok weekend 2
UK L&T weekend 2
*EDIT*
And lets not forget that the film has been banned in a number of other countries as well so it's be losing millions of dollars from that.
That's not to say it was a flop. Definitely not when it made 4.7x it's budget. A film usually needs to make at least 3x its budget to break even on production and marketing.
That's where L&T is going to have a tough time. With all the delays and new marketing for each new release date, I'd imagine it probably needs to make more like 3.25x-3.5x it's budget, or $812M-$875M. That's going to be a tall order for a movie that's dropping quicker than its predecessor, which did $850M.
sol_bad
Member
No, Ragnarok didn't have the best of legs.
That's not to say it was a flop. Definitely not when it made 4.7x it's budget. A film usually needs to make at least 3x its budget to break even on production and marketing.
That's where L&T is going to have a tough time. With all the delays and new marketing for each new release date, I'd imagine it probably needs to make more like 3.25x-3.5x it's budget, or $812M-$875M. That's going to be a tall order for a movie that's dropping quicker than its predecessor, which did $850M.
There is no definitive proof to this 3x budget claim which has been around for over a decade. No production company has ever come out of advertising expenses and cinemas haven't come out with how much profit they make on box office tickets. It's all estimations based on nothing and hearsay. I mean back in the day Marvel Studios were happy with the box office returns for The Incredible Hulk and Captain America 1
Last edited:
thismeinteil
Member
Lol, you can live in denial all you want, but it is an accepted fact, put out by insiders who know the movie business. And obviously Marvel was not happy with the Incredible Hulk's take, as it never received a sequel, unlike the other movies that performed at, or close to, the 3x multiplier. Captain America was a 2.6x multiplier, but also did very well with home video sales.
Hell, sometimes a movie can be above a 3x multiplier and still be seen as a disappointment. Take Suicide Squad, for example. It made 4.3x its production budget, yet was seen as a disappointment because WB spent so damn much on pushing the film. They tried rebooting the franchise, which ended up flopping.
sol_bad
Member
Hulk not getting a sequel has nothing to do with it's performance, it's to do with distribution rights. Iron Man 2, Thor and Captain America were already in production by the time Hulk released. Then Disney bought Marvel and took on all distribution from Avengers onwards.
You need to show actual proof of insiders mentioning advertising budgets and expected box office numbers to make a profit. You'll only find articles from authors who don't really have links to the actual industry and Redit/Quora threads where there is no proof of anything.
Last edited:
Come on, the whole 2-3x budget BO earnings to break even is so institutionalized there is no need to prove it. That's been the calculation for DECADES. It's pretty simple.
Theaters take roughly a 50% cut. So at a minimum a film needs to do 2x budget just for that. The marketing spend has historically been about 50-100% of the budget for most films, so that gets us to the 3-4xBO= break even mark.
Now obviously distributors have been taking more of the first few weeks BO, most big films are heavily weighted to the first few weeks, and marketing is a lot more nedulous these days to the calculation is more of a swag. But the blu-ray/DVD market is in tatters and who really knows what streaming fees are like.
But to suggest the 2-3x figure is voodoo or something is straight disingenuous, that's been the math for a looooong time.
Theaters take roughly a 50% cut. So at a minimum a film needs to do 2x budget just for that. The marketing spend has historically been about 50-100% of the budget for most films, so that gets us to the 3-4xBO= break even mark.
Now obviously distributors have been taking more of the first few weeks BO, most big films are heavily weighted to the first few weeks, and marketing is a lot more nedulous these days to the calculation is more of a swag. But the blu-ray/DVD market is in tatters and who really knows what streaming fees are like.
But to suggest the 2-3x figure is voodoo or something is straight disingenuous, that's been the math for a looooong time.
sol_bad
Member
I'll happily accept 2x but not 3x. Many studios have been happy with many projects that had 2x at the box office.
Last edited:
Ulysses 31
Member
Marvel tends to have a lot of marketing so is that 3x really a stretch?
That's because they were counting on DVD. I'm not sure that's much of a market these days.
Granted, a films budget is largely fictitious tax write offs anyway, the whole industry is criminal.
DelireMan7
Member
So finally saw the movie !
It's the first time I see a MCU movie while having red some of the original comics they took inspiration from.
The God butcher story is just amazing in the comics so I was kind of prepared that it will be not as great in the movie.
The Mighty Thor is also a pretty nice (and long) story arc.
When I learnt these 2 stories were merged into a 2h movie, my expectations for a good adaptation were shattered...
Gorr is underutilized and his design is really bland. I was not fan of the Necrosword being an actual simple sword but they succeed to make something interesting with the shadow monsters.
I find the Mighty Thor transition to quick (also taking out the mystery of who is the mighty Thor is a let down for me. But I get it, they cannot not adapt 100% a comic. To be honest I think I mainly pissed because I also love the Original Sin story that leads to the Mighty Thor story and here it was completely different origin).
But my main complaint is not tied to the comic adapdation. The biggest offender of the movie is the humor... Just everything, EVERYTHING is subject to joke and ridiculed, included Thor himself. You can't take anything seriously. It just removes any tension or fear you could have for the characters. It was working of Thor Ragnarok, but here it doesn't work for me. Got really fast fed up with the "jealous Stormbreaker" joke which never stops.
Also I know it's the new direction Disney took but all the stuff with the kids is too much. Thor powering up a group of kids that will fight shadow monster with teddy bear ? ...
A good point for the movie is the fight scene. I find them really cool visually and with a lot of good idea (especially how the Mighty Thor use the fact that Mjolnir is shattered, really nice touch).
So yeah... First time I am so disappointed with a MCU movie.
It's the first time I see a MCU movie while having red some of the original comics they took inspiration from.
The God butcher story is just amazing in the comics so I was kind of prepared that it will be not as great in the movie.
The Mighty Thor is also a pretty nice (and long) story arc.
When I learnt these 2 stories were merged into a 2h movie, my expectations for a good adaptation were shattered...
Gorr is underutilized and his design is really bland. I was not fan of the Necrosword being an actual simple sword but they succeed to make something interesting with the shadow monsters.
I find the Mighty Thor transition to quick (also taking out the mystery of who is the mighty Thor is a let down for me. But I get it, they cannot not adapt 100% a comic. To be honest I think I mainly pissed because I also love the Original Sin story that leads to the Mighty Thor story and here it was completely different origin).
But my main complaint is not tied to the comic adapdation. The biggest offender of the movie is the humor... Just everything, EVERYTHING is subject to joke and ridiculed, included Thor himself. You can't take anything seriously. It just removes any tension or fear you could have for the characters. It was working of Thor Ragnarok, but here it doesn't work for me. Got really fast fed up with the "jealous Stormbreaker" joke which never stops.
Also I know it's the new direction Disney took but all the stuff with the kids is too much. Thor powering up a group of kids that will fight shadow monster with teddy bear ? ...
A good point for the movie is the fight scene. I find them really cool visually and with a lot of good idea (especially how the Mighty Thor use the fact that Mjolnir is shattered, really nice touch).
So yeah... First time I am so disappointed with a MCU movie.
Last edited:
mcjmetroid
Member
Well I enjoyed this one a lot.
I think this is going to be one of those movies the comic fans are not going to like but regular people are. Comic book fans like to take everything seriously.
I think this is going to be one of those movies the comic fans are not going to like but regular people are. Comic book fans like to take everything seriously.
AJUMP23
Parody of actual AJUMP23
Just watched the movie and I was disappointed overall. The movie feels like it is trying to hard. And most of the jokes don't hit for me. Korg becomes annoying more than anything else. Where the last Thor felt effortless, this one feels like everyone feels like they are trying really hard.
I did enjoy the section with Zeus, and found that a lot of fun. I thought the villain was OK, but I thought eternity and Elden Ring took a page out of the same book for the ultimate god.
Also why doesn't Thor get a "wish" when he gets to the place as well?
I did enjoy the section with Zeus, and found that a lot of fun. I thought the villain was OK, but I thought eternity and Elden Ring took a page out of the same book for the ultimate god.
Also why doesn't Thor get a "wish" when he gets to the place as well?
Ulysses 31
Member
Only the first person to ever get there gets to make the only wish Eternity is granting. Otherwise any problem could be solved with this wish granter from now on.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked