Thor (2011)

[Bartmanhomer]

Hey, everybody, I feel like that I'm in a mood to discuss Thor.

Spoiler: My Thoughts On Thor (2011)

Show

Thor is about a Norse deity who face his brother Loki who want to take over Asgard. His father Odin is ageing and wants someone to inherit his throne. This movie is good. I'm actually glad that Marvel choose a good cast for the Thor. Chris Hemdall did a good job performing Thor. I'll give this movie 4 out of 5 stars.

[Olinser]

Hey, everybody, I feel like that I'm in a mood to discuss Thor.

Spoiler: My Thoughts On Thor (2011)

Show

Thor is about a Norse deity who face his brother Loki who want to take over Asgard. His father Odin is ageing and wants someone to inherit his throne. This movie is good. I'm actually glad that Marvel choose a good cast for the Thor. Chris Hemdall did a good job performing Thor. I'll give this movie 4 out of 5 stars.

It was serviceable but not great. At least it avoided any glaringly bad points unlike its sequel which was one of the worst movies Marvel has ever made.

It mainly suffers from 2 things:

1) The movie can't seem to decide what Loki's actual goal is, so he acts really inconsistently throughout the movie. He switches from taking the throne to wanting to kill Jotunheim apparently on a whim, and then feels the need to lure the Jotun king into trying to kill Odin as an excuse to kill them. Except for the fact that, you know, he's ALREADY KING and could declare war on Jotunheim anytime he wanted, especially given that they had already tried to infiltrate the palace less than a week ago.

Can't fault Hiddleston's performance, he's an amazing actor, but the characterization was just off in this movie.

Loki got much better come Avengers, but this movie was not a great start for the character.

2) Natalie Portman is utterly ridiculous and impossible to take seriously when giving canned 'LUL I'M A PHYSICIST' lines, and she is utterly pointless to the plot. She and Hemsworth have zero chemistry, spend almost zero time actually together alone, and suddenly they're in love? It was bad even for a Hollywood romance. She's not believable as a scientist, and she's not believable as his love interest. She could have been cut entirely from the movie and just left Selvig in place and it would have been just as good (maybe better)

Heck I actually thought he had more chemistry with Selvig after he busted Thor out and they got drunk together!

Overall I'd rate this about 7/10, decent movie but not great, but does serve as an acceptable introduction for the character.

[Ramza00]

It was serviceable but not great. At least it avoided any glaringly bad points unlike its sequel which was one of the worst movies Marvel has ever made.

It mainly suffers from 2 things:

1) The movie can't seem to decide what Loki's actual goal is, so he acts really inconsistently throughout the movie. He switches from taking the throne to wanting to kill Jotunheim apparently on a whim, and then feels the need to lure the Jotun king into trying to kill Odin as an excuse to kill them. Except for the fact that, you know, he's ALREADY KING and could declare war on Jotunheim anytime he wanted, especially given that they had already tried to infiltrate the palace less than a week ago.

Can't fault Hiddleston's performance, he's an amazing actor, but the characterization was just off in this movie.

Loki got much better come Avengers, but this movie was not a great start for the character.

Loki's goal is to embarrass his brother on his big day for he is full of envy and he thought it would be good fun.
(goal shift) Thor gets angry and Loki still enjoying his good fun gets Thor to embarrass himself further by going to Jotunheim and starting trouble.
[Odin does behavior that Loki was not expecting, banishing Thor, Loki is surprised]
(goal shift) Loki discovers he is not Odin's son and is a frost giant, note he just got his own brother banished and now Loki is scarred but he is barely aware of this feeling inside his subconscious. It is not a cognizant thought, his fear, all he is feeling is pain, confusion, betrayl from his adopted father for he has been told lies his entire life and thus he does not have the language to describe how he feels. Odin falls asleep.

Remember Loki whole life has been using Thor as a foil / mirror to feel at home and to feel at safe, and finally to create an image by building an identity around himself of being the Anti-Thor. If Thor is brash then Loki will be crafty and prudent, so on and so on. But now Loki feels lost for he does not know who he is due to his adoptive heritage being revealed, Thor being gone (his foil and mirror), and Odin being in his Odin Sleep. Loki has power as a stand-by king but Loki doesn't have a clue what to do with said power for all his previous ideas of how to use that power was mimetic desire where he wanted to be like his father figure Odin, or he wanted the approval of Thor his brother who was also the person he created a contrasting identity around like many boy siblings do when they are similar ages to each other and they do not have many playmates beside them they spend a whole lot of time around as toddlers / young children.

(goal shift) since Loki did not know his own desires, he wants to keep Thor away from the throne for Loki is now is king. Yet Loki does not know what he wants besides to deny others from taking it.
(goal shift) Loki decides after him not being worthy of Thor's hammer to instead prove his worth to his dad by destroying Jotunheim and performing genocide. Mimetic Desire here for Loki only wants to destroy Jotunheim for his dad was once at war with them, and he is going to outdo Dad, and outdo Thor. At the same time there is some Freudian stuff happening for if he destroys his people in a genocide he will no longer be adopted in his mind for he will not have anyone to fall back too. Of course this is "literal nonsense" but there is some form of emotional / relationship logic with this desire.
(goal shift) Loki is bewildered why Thor is trying to destroy the bifrost after they lost the tustle. He wants to understand Thor's logic for via understanding another he can understand his own pain.
(goal shift) Loki is in pain even though his brother and father love him and forgive him. Loki decides to throw himself into the void and he thus becomes a monster. His monster is to deny his own pain and longing and to thus "wear a mask" concealing his true feelings in Avengers 1, Thor 2, and so on until Thor 3: Ragnarok.

Loki is motivated by envy, melancholy, and trying to figure out feelings he feels but he does not have a language / identity to organize around. Yes it is a convoluted mess that is not explained well on screen for to experience what Loki is feeling you must observe his choices and the backdrop of the choices and try to make sense of them all. It is pure "show" and not "telling" and too much showing without telling can leave the viewer feeling confused. For there is like 7 different goal shifts of Loki's motivation through the movie when each time a new speedbump is thrown at Loki he must process what it means and thus how Loki feels and who is Loki at the end of this speedbump.

In the end the whole story of Thor 1 is a parallel story where Thor figures out who he is via the end of the movie, moving from hubris to a firm identity, while Loki is the opposite where he was so convinced he knew who he was at the start of the movie (Loki is his relationships) but at the end of the movie he does not know who he is for all his relationships were based on lies, mistruths, feelings of envy and melancholy, etc even if there was an authenticity here (authentic feelings) it was still based off mistruths and thus how can you be certain of your relationships when everything is based around lies.

And thus Loki Lie-Smith is born, god of Lies, god of Mischief is born.

[JadedDM]

She's not believable as a scientist...

What would have made her more believable as a scientist? If she always wore a white lab coat and glasses?

[Peelee]

What would have made her more believable as a scientist? If she always wore a white lab coat and glasses?

Having a control Asgardian would have been nice.

[Kitten Champion]

What would have made her more believable as a scientist? If she always wore a white lab coat and glasses?

What's more "believable scientist" is a weird concept in the Marvel Universe, where there are so many scientist characters with widely different character designs and personae.

Personally, I think making her a scientist was convenient for the story but ultimately not for her as a character. Making her a nurse or an EMT like in Earth's Mightiest Heroes would've given her more weight thematically as someone who saves lives in a stressful and potentially dangerous job that doesn't earn her much in the way of glory or any martial honour.

Making her a scientist gave her a reason to be there, to express intellectual interest in Thor, and most importantly provide exposition for one of Marvel's weirdest heroes to the audience, but it didn't really provide a foundation for her characterization.

[Vinyadan]

I found it pretty bad. Even the final fight didn't make any sense to me. It's the reason why I didn't watch any Marvel movie for years.

[Olinser]

What would have made her more believable as a scientist? If she always wore a white lab coat and glasses?

Having better writers to start with, then delivering lines with any kind of presence like she had any idea what she was talking about, instead of delivering laughable crap like Clarke's Third Law without any actual justification.

Also not being shoehorned into the plot and serving no actual purpose.

I seriously felt like Mystery Science Theatre 3000. "Mr Super Buff Physical Alien Superhero, this is Ms Scientist Woman Love Interest."

[LibraryOgre]

I loved this movie... partially on the strength of Thor and the Warriors Three (plus one). While they weren't given a lot to do mid-to-late movie, their time in Jotunheim was so JOYFUL in their fighting. Like, this is what they were trained for, and it was what they loved to do.

Patrick Doyle's score as also faboo. I love Sons of Odin, in particular.

[Lemmy]

I think this movie come as close as movie can get to "OK...".

It isn't good. It isn't bad... It's Ok.

Serviceable, but very forgettable.

[Velaryon]

She and Hemsworth have zero chemistry, spend almost zero time actually together alone, and suddenly they're in love? It was bad even for a Hollywood romance. She's not believable as a scientist, and she's not believable as his love interest. She could have been cut entirely from the movie and just left Selvig in place and it would have been just as good (maybe better)

To be fair, I can't think of anyone I've seen Natalie Portman have good romantic chemistry with.

Anyway, I rank this movie third from the bottom on the list of MCU films, with only the Iron Man sequels coming in lower. Thor isn't a particularly engaging character to me by himself (or at least, he wasn't until Ragnarok), the love story is a complete failure for me, and the dynamic between Thor and Loki is done better in every other movie they appear in together.

[Olinser]

I loved this movie... partially on the strength of Thor and the Warriors Three (plus one). While they weren't given a lot to do mid-to-late movie, their time in Jotunheim was so JOYFUL in their fighting. Like, this is what they were trained for, and it was what they loved to do.

Patrick Doyle's score as also faboo. I love Sons of Odin, in particular.

I'd totally see a Sif and the Warriors Three movie.

I think at one point they had planned on it, but it got canned before it even got to pre-production. Probably because Jaimie Alexander was declining to appear in any more Marvel movies after getting the starring role in Blindspot - she was conspicuously absent from Ragnarok despite all of the Warriors Three getting killed, and it was blatantly obvious that Valkyrie's role in Endgame was supposed to be Sif.

[Jallorn]

My main complaint about the film is admittedly sort of nitpicky, and it's the bit where Thor says, essentially, "Magic is just science," but I think it's emblematic of why Thor as a character needed a re-imagining for Thor 3: no one actually had faith in Thor as high fantasy, and in fact seemed ashamed of it. Much like in the 2000 X-Men film where a joke about, "What would you prefer, yellow spandex?" reveals a sort of shame of the comic book origins of the source material, needing to justify magic as science (because The Dark Knight showed that superhero movies should be realistic and gritty ) displays shame at the nature of Thor's character as a literal god from Norse Mythology.

Basically, I think that that attitude hamstrung the ability to write stories about Thor that worked, if only because it meant that the writers didn't really get the appeal of the character.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I always took the yellow spandex line to be a crack about putting a super-verse covert action team in something that eye-catching. The black leather look was much better for that job.

[BeerMug Paladin]

I've only ever seen a few of the marvel movies. This one was the one I enjoyed the most. Not because it was good, but because it was just so very, very bad that it came across as amusing. I suspect it would be less amusing on a rewatch.

When the archer suddenly appeared and started attacking people for no discernible reason was one of my best ever "so bad it's good" moments. Maybe I missed some important context, but the way it was shot made me think he was just some guy who wanted to infiltrate some random military base because it suddenly sprang into existence in a single day. He's just here looking for an extreme challenge you guys. He'll be on his way soon enough.

I don't even remember him being a character in the movie, or whether or not he actually accomplished anything in that scene except to create an action sequence. From what I remember I had several of these moments where something appears or is referenced as if I'm supposed to know what it is, and I don't. Or like the thing like with the sudden archer guy. (That ridiculous helmet Loki wears when he names himself King was pretty funny too.)

Unfortunately, the people I watched it with didn't find these things as funny-bad as I did. They just thought it was regular-bad.

[TronGuy]

Unfortunately I was never a big Thor fan and didn't like any of his movies until Ragnarok. I can understand other people really liking this movie, but Thor was always a bit silly to me (which is why I like the full comedy of Ragnarok).

[Tvtyrant]

Honestly of the OG Avenger line up Chris Hemsworth was the weakest actor, and his movies were the weakest. None of them avoided feeling like two distinct movies that have been crammed together ad hoc, and nearly every character but Loki was wasted.

[Wookieetank]

Honestly of the OG Avenger line up Chris Hemsworth was the weakest actor, and his movies were the weakest. None of them avoided feeling like two distinct movies that have been crammed together ad hoc, and nearly every character but Loki was wasted.

Yeah, Loki was the big draw for me in Thor 2 & 3. Would've much rather seen him join up with the GotG crew over Thor since Loki is already a scoundrel type character. Not that I hate Thor, its just that Loki is so much more interesting, might have something to do with being a bit of a trickster myself...

[Tvtyrant]

Yeah, Loki was the big draw for me in Thor 2 & 3. Would've much rather seen him join up with the GotG crew over Thor since Loki is already a scoundrel type character. Not that I hate Thor, its just that Loki is so much more interesting, might have something to do with being a bit of a trickster myself...

I would love a Nebula/Loki movie. I feel like they would have a lot of chemistry.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Yeah, like mixing nitric acid and glycerine.

[Olinser]

Honestly of the OG Avenger line up Chris Hemsworth was the weakest actor, and his movies were the weakest. None of them avoided feeling like two distinct movies that have been crammed together ad hoc, and nearly every character but Loki was wasted.

It's funny when people bring up stuff like this is like when people say, "Marvel has never made a bad movie".

When you say stuff like that you're glossing over the Marvel actors and characters that literally never appeared again.

He's definitely a better actor than either Eric Bana or Nicholas Cage, who had Marvel movies so bad they were either replaced immediately or never mentioned in the wider MCU ever again.

[JadedDM]

It's funny when people bring up stuff like this is like when people say, "Marvel has never made a bad movie".

When you say stuff like that you're glossing over the Marvel actors and characters that literally never appeared again.

He's definitely a better actor than either Eric Bana or Nicholas Cage, who had Marvel movies so bad they were either replaced immediately or never mentioned in the wider MCU ever again.

Neither of those movies (Hulk and Ghost Rider) were part of the MCU or made by Marvel. Hulk was Universal and Ghost Rider was Sony.

[Tvtyrant]

It's funny when people bring up stuff like this is like when people say, "Marvel has never made a bad movie".

When you say stuff like that you're glossing over the Marvel actors and characters that literally never appeared again.

He's definitely a better actor than either Eric Bana or Nicholas Cage, who had Marvel movies so bad they were either replaced immediately or never mentioned in the wider MCU ever again.

I literally said "of the OG Avengers lineup." I have plenty of words in my mouth without others adding them in.