|
Post by Nalkarj on Aug 12, 2018 21:45:50 GMT
All in all, folks, after having some time to mull it over while doing lawn work, I feel that, while there’s a lot that I liked about Thor: Ragnarok (Hemsworth’s appealing goofiness, Mark Ruffalo’s Banner/Hulk, Jeff Goldblum, the humor), it just didn’t work for me. Many of the elements, even the ones I like, are just too disparate and even incomplete: as I wrote to No Morpho, Only Bánh mì , the Ragnarök scenes and the funny Goldblum scenes don’t fit, and I ended up wondering if I were supposed to be concerned or interested in the destruction of Asgard—because I wasn’t, to be frank. This is the first Marvel movie I’ve seen where I’ve understood the complaint (here and elsewhere) that Marvel’s movies don’t have “real stakes.” Now, I disagree with that assertion per se, still, as I felt like Iron Man, Captain America, and Winter Soldier (and even Spider-Man: Homecoming in its own modest, awkward way) had real stakes, and I found them really very good movies. But Thor: Ragnarok seemed to disarm our concern at every stage. Thor’s trapped in a cage by a fire-demon? He gets out offstage. Loki’s taken over Asgard? He just uses his newfound power to have everyone else flatter him. Asgard’s destroyed, all the gods die? Ehh, take whoever’s left and rebuild somewhere else. “It’s not a place, it’s a people,” after all. I have absolutely no problem with a goofy, irreverent sci-fi flick, but this is not the story to tell for it. And the Cate Blanchett character (Hela) quite literally comes out of nowhere, unless there’s some earlier flick where she’s mentioned that I’m not aware of. (In the mythology, Hel was one of Loki’s three children, along with the Fenris Wolf and the Midgard Serpent.) She just pops up and ruins the realm/planet/country/city—ehh, and why not, if all everyone needed to do from the beginning was get out of Asgard and rebuild it somewhere else? And I’m annoyed at myself for summing up against it, as I enjoyed Goldblum’s humor (though the Goldblum character is rather irrelevant to the proceedings) and several other parts as well. But the ground is undercut at every stage, the filmmakers are afraid of making a serious story too serious, and I felt that the movie came off as a missed opportunity more than anything.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Aug 13, 2018 11:41:21 GMT
All in all, folks, after having some time to mull it over while doing lawn work, I feel that, while there’s a lot that I liked about Thor: Ragnarok (Hemsworth’s appealing goofiness, Mark Ruffalo’s Banner/Hulk, Jeff Goldblum, the humor), it just didn’t work for me. Many of the elements, even the ones I like, are just too disparate and even incomplete: as I wrote to No Morpho, Only Bánh mì , the Ragnarök scenes and the funny Goldblum scenes don’t fit, and I ended up wondering if I were supposed to be concerned or interested in the destruction of Asgard—because I wasn’t, to be frank. This is the first Marvel movie I’ve seen where I’ve understood the complaint (here and elsewhere) that Marvel’s movies don’t have “real stakes.” Now, I disagree with that assertion per se, still, as I felt like Iron Man, Captain America, and Winter Soldier (and even Spider-Man: Homecoming in its own modest, awkward way) had real stakes, and I found them really very good movies. But Thor: Ragnarok seemed to disarm our concern at every stage. Thor’s trapped in a cage by a fire-demon? He gets out offstage. Loki’s taken over Asgard? He just uses his newfound power to have everyone else flatter him. Asgard’s destroyed, all the gods die? Ehh, take whoever’s left and rebuild somewhere else. “It’s not a place, it’s a people,” after all. I have absolutely no problem with a goofy, irreverent sci-fi flick, but this is not the story to tell for it. And the Cate Blanchett character (Hela) quite literally comes out of nowhere, unless there’s some earlier flick where she’s mentioned that I’m not aware of. (In the mythology, Hel was one of Loki’s three children, along with the Fenris Wolf and the Midgard Serpent.) She just pops up and ruins the realm/planet/country/city—ehh, and why not, if all everyone needed to do from the beginning was get out of Asgard and rebuild it somewhere else? And I’m annoyed at myself for summing up against it, as I enjoyed Goldblum’s humor (though the Goldblum character is rather irrelevant to the proceedings) and several other parts as well. But the ground is undercut at every stage, the filmmakers are afraid of making a serious story too serious, and I felt that the movie came off as a missed opportunity more than anything. shared universe disease! This channels Guardians of the Galaxy a lot more than it does the first 2 Thor movies. The reason is simple: the former made loads more money than the latter. Thus, consistent storytelling, tone and world building are flushed down the rainbow bridge:
1. Bastardizes and trivializes the Norse mythology by turning the epic Ragnarök myth into jokey Fragglerock famaly entertainemt (no protagonist dies, even the destruction of Valhalla/Asgards literally becomes a lame joke).
2. Disregards and abandons tone, story beats, set ups and characters developments of the previous Thor & Avengers films (Loki's rise, Loki's character becomes lovable sidekick, star crossed lovers-romance gone, Jane & Co discarded with juvelile jokes, Thor cries like girl when getting a haircut, Odin does not care for Asgard, evil daughter pops suddenly up etc).
3. Screeplay is unbalanced alotting more time to the B-story (Thor clobbers Hulk in arena) than to the Ragnarök storyline. It's as if they randomly mixed together two popular stories/comics that naturally do not blend well (like the biblical Apocalypse with Falsh Gordon).
4. CGI went overboard. Synthetic, nice-but-forgettable soundrack just because it's hip, and even inclusion of licensed 70s rock songs even though this film abandons Earth (have your cake and eat it too).
MCU fans loved it. And it's still a lot more bearable than Guardians, you should really watch this and make a thread.
Dance off, turd blossom, you and me bro!
|
|
kanekikun
Sophomore
@kanekikun
Posts: 236
Likes: 18
|
Post by kanekikun on Aug 13, 2018 11:48:40 GMT
tis was a good movie, thor had lots of wack space adventres in the 70s like this.
and hela isnt different from how tdkr had ras daughter come from nowhere when nothing in begins says he had a kid.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Aug 13, 2018 14:25:55 GMT
tis was a good movie, thor had lots of wack space adventres in the 70s like this. and hela isnt different from how tdkr had ras daughter come from nowhere when nothing in begins says he had a kid. Oh, I’m completely onboard with wacky space adventures. This one just felt underwhelming, undramatic, inconsistent (internally and compared to the series at large), and perhaps half-finished (script-wise). Thank heaven the humor and acting were good.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Aug 13, 2018 14:35:57 GMT
shared universe disease! This channels Guardians of the Galaxy a lot more than it does the first 2 Thor movies. The reason is simple: the former made loads more money than the latter. Thus, consistent storytelling, tone and world building are flushed down the rainbow bridge:
1. Bastardizes and trivializes the Norse mythology by turning the epic Ragnarök myth into jokey Fragglerock famaly entertainemt (no protagonist dies, even the destruction of Valhalla/Asgards literally becomes a lame joke).
2. Disregards and abandons tone, story beats, set ups and characters developments of the previous Thor & Avengers films (Loki's rise, Loki's character becomes lovable sidekick, star crossed lovers-romance gone, Jane & Co discarded with juvelile jokes, Thor cries like girl when getting a haircut, Odin does not care for Asgard, evil daughter pops suddenly up etc).
3. Screeplay is unbalanced alotting more time to the B-story (Thor clobbers Hulk in arena) than to the Ragnarök storyline. It's as if they randomly mixed together two popular stories/comics that naturally do not blend well (like the biblical Apocalypse with Falsh Gordon).
4. CGI went overboard. Synthetic, nice-but-forgettable soundrack just because it's hip, and even inclusion of licensed 70s rock songs even though this film abandons Earth (have your cake and eat it too).
MCU fans loved it. And it's still a lot more bearable than Guardians, you should really watch this and make a thread.
Dance off, turd blossom, you and me bro! I think I actually agree with much of what you wrote, Tristan, though I certainly liked the movie more than you did. I found it funny and well-acted (Hemsworth has good comic timing, and Goldblum could have sleepwalked through a surprisingly small role but chose not to, I’m a big fan of Ruffalo’s Hulk, who I thought was the best part of The Avengers), but I think you’re right about the screenplay problems and the inconsistency. Though I may have my mythology-lover credentials revoked for this, I didn’t go in expecting faithfulness to the text because, of course, it is very much its own thing (though I must say I far prefer the mythology). But it all felt like a tempest in a teapot, a gag rather than a catharsis, and the tone simply seemed all over the place.
|
|
kanekikun
Sophomore
@kanekikun
Posts: 236
Likes: 18
|
Post by kanekikun on Aug 13, 2018 14:42:25 GMT
ragnarok isnt the total end of norse stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 13, 2018 14:44:25 GMT
All in all, folks, after having some time to mull it over while doing lawn work, I feel that, while there’s a lot that I liked about Thor: Ragnarok (Hemsworth’s appealing goofiness, Mark Ruffalo’s Banner/Hulk, Jeff Goldblum, the humor), it just didn’t work for me. Many of the elements, even the ones I like, are just too disparate and even incomplete: as I wrote to No Morpho, Only Bánh mì , the Ragnarök scenes and the funny Goldblum scenes don’t fit, and I ended up wondering if I were supposed to be concerned or interested in the destruction of Asgard—because I wasn’t, to be frank. This is the first Marvel movie I’ve seen where I’ve understood the complaint (here and elsewhere) that Marvel’s movies don’t have “real stakes.” Now, I disagree with that assertion per se, still, as I felt like Iron Man, Captain America, and Winter Soldier (and even Spider-Man: Homecoming in its own modest, awkward way) had real stakes, and I found them really very good movies. But Thor: Ragnarok seemed to disarm our concern at every stage. Thor’s trapped in a cage by a fire-demon? He gets out offstage. Loki’s taken over Asgard? He just uses his newfound power to have everyone else flatter him. Asgard’s destroyed, all the gods die? Ehh, take whoever’s left and rebuild somewhere else. “It’s not a place, it’s a people,” after all. I have absolutely no problem with a goofy, irreverent sci-fi flick, but this is not the story to tell for it. And the Cate Blanchett character (Hela) quite literally comes out of nowhere, unless there’s some earlier flick where she’s mentioned that I’m not aware of. (In the mythology, Hel was one of Loki’s three children, along with the Fenris Wolf and the Midgard Serpent.) She just pops up and ruins the realm/planet/country/city—ehh, and why not, if all everyone needed to do from the beginning was get out of Asgard and rebuild it somewhere else? And I’m annoyed at myself for summing up against it, as I enjoyed Goldblum’s humor (though the Goldblum character is rather irrelevant to the proceedings) and several other parts as well. But the ground is undercut at every stage, the filmmakers are afraid of making a serious story too serious, and I felt that the movie came off as a missed opportunity more than anything. I know what you mean. I love it even though I feel like in principle I should hate it. You and Tristan make some solid points as to how it sh!ts on the mythology, let alone previous film canon. The thing is, at least for me, it fixed the problems with the previous two installments. It was actually fun to watch. I never cared for the Jane Foster stuff and the villain in Dark World was just plain terrible. They should've saved Ragnarok for the next film and called this one Battleworld or something. Cosmic weirdness, all the zany characters, it made for a lot of laughs. But you shouldn't turn an end of the world story into a gag. If I had a magic wand, I'd have them work the Ragnarok stuff into Infinty War instead of cramming it into this wacky space adventure. Like I said, I really enjoyed it from start to finish, but I completely understand where people who didn't like it are coming from.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Aug 13, 2018 15:38:44 GMT
shared universe disease! This channels Guardians of the Galaxy a lot more than it does the first 2 Thor movies. The reason is simple: the former made loads more money than the latter. Thus, consistent storytelling, tone and world building are flushed down the rainbow bridge:
1. Bastardizes and trivializes the Norse mythology by turning the epic Ragnarök myth into jokey Fragglerock famaly entertainemt (no protagonist dies, even the destruction of Valhalla/Asgards literally becomes a lame joke).
2. Disregards and abandons tone, story beats, set ups and characters developments of the previous Thor & Avengers films (Loki's rise, Loki's character becomes lovable sidekick, star crossed lovers-romance gone, Jane & Co discarded with juvelile jokes, Thor cries like girl when getting a haircut, Odin does not care for Asgard, evil daughter pops suddenly up etc).
3. Screeplay is unbalanced alotting more time to the B-story (Thor clobbers Hulk in arena) than to the Ragnarök storyline. It's as if they randomly mixed together two popular stories/comics that naturally do not blend well (like the biblical Apocalypse with Falsh Gordon).
4. CGI went overboard. Synthetic, nice-but-forgettable soundrack just because it's hip, and even inclusion of licensed 70s rock songs even though this film abandons Earth (have your cake and eat it too).
MCU fans loved it. And it's still a lot more bearable than Guardians, you should really watch this and make a thread.
Dance off, turd blossom, you and me bro! I think I actually agree with much of what you wrote, Tristan, though I certainly liked the movie more than you did. I found it funny and well-acted (Hemsworth has good comic timing, and Goldblum could have sleepwalked through a surprisingly small role but chose not to, I’m a big fan of Ruffalo’s Hulk, who I thought was the best part of The Avengers), but I think you’re right about the screenplay problems and the inconsistency. Though I may have my mythology-lover credentials revoked for this, I didn’t go in expecting faithfulness to the text because, of course, it is very much its own thing (though I must say I far prefer the mythology). But it all felt like a tempest in a teapot, a gag rather than a catharsis, and the tone simply seemed all over the place.fair enough and well said!
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Aug 13, 2018 15:40:24 GMT
ragnarok isnt the total end of norse stuff. Of “Norse stuff”? Not sure what you mean by that. Gimlé? Some believe it was a Christian addition to the mythology, but either way the gods, Asgard, Valhalla, Yggdrasil were all gone after Ragnarök.
|
|
kanekikun
Sophomore
@kanekikun
Posts: 236
Likes: 18
|
Post by kanekikun on Aug 13, 2018 15:45:12 GMT
ragnarok isnt the total end of norse stuff. Of “Norse stuff”? Not sure what you mean by that. Gimlé? Some believe it was a Christian addition to the mythology, but either way the gods, Asgard, Valhalla, Yggdrasil were all gone after Ragnarök. in ragnarok everything sinks and some survie and then the dead come back and they fix everything.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Aug 13, 2018 16:13:58 GMT
Of “Norse stuff”? Not sure what you mean by that. Gimlé? Some believe it was a Christian addition to the mythology, but either way the gods, Asgard, Valhalla, Yggdrasil were all gone after Ragnarök. in ragnarok everything sinks and some survie and then the dead come back and they fix everything. In the myths or the comics? I don’t know anything about how Ragnarok was handled in the comics.
|
|
kanekikun
Sophomore
@kanekikun
Posts: 236
Likes: 18
|
Post by kanekikun on Aug 13, 2018 16:24:17 GMT
in the myths
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Aug 14, 2018 2:15:33 GMT
I’m actually watching another superhero movie (belying my “exhaustion” comment, perhaps, though it’s a different animal altogether)— The Dark Knight, of all things! The movie everyone loves but me! Will probably only watch the first half or so. Anyway, serious question: where should I write down my thoughts on this one? The DCEU forum doesn’t exactly work, right (though I put Superman Returns there with no real problem)? Should I risk Lord Death Man’s wrath and post off-topic?
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Aug 14, 2018 2:53:34 GMT
Guess no live-log on this one. But I’m amazed how much of this I’ve forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Aug 14, 2018 3:08:55 GMT
Nalkarj after you've weathered the wrath of Manchester666 …. why worry about LDM ? … OT would be good for a review if we are not to get a scene by scene !! (imo)
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Aug 14, 2018 3:31:18 GMT
I’m actually watching another superhero movie (belying my “exhaustion” comment, perhaps, though it’s a different animal altogether)— The Dark Knight, of all things! The movie everyone loves but me! Will probably only watch the first half or so. Anyway, serious question: where should I write down my thoughts on this one? The DCEU forum doesn’t exactly work, right (though I put Superman Returns there with no real problem)? Should I risk Lord Death Man ’s wrath and post off-topic? Die well, Nalkarj.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Aug 14, 2018 3:37:38 GMT
I can’t tell if this is an actual (if only-by-Internet) threat or a simplistic and rather tired gag.
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Aug 14, 2018 3:40:07 GMT
Nalkarj I was just going to ask if LDM has the same style as Manchester … seems so far off that he HAS to be joking ~~~ but it turns out that he isn't ?
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Aug 14, 2018 3:46:38 GMT
Nalkarj I was just going to ask if LDM has the same style as Manchester … seems so far off that he HAS to be joking ~~~ but it turns out that he isn't ? Well, I hope he’s joking. I can’t ever tell with him.
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Aug 14, 2018 3:49:58 GMT
Gives us something else in common, Nalkarj welcome to the "I Have Received a Death Threat on the Internet" Club ! Meetings are the First Thursday of the Month at around 8 PM in the Old Schoolhouse by the Bridge. If it was a "joke", come anyway !
|
|