|
|
Post by thenewnexus on Dec 19, 2018 22:59:00 GMT
It deserves its sucessful
|
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Dec 20, 2018 0:25:37 GMT
The Marvel comic book version of Thor, of which the Ragnarok movie is based on, is only fairly LOOSELY inspired by the actual mythology of the Norsemen. The differences between the Thor of mythology and the Thor of the Marvel comic books are almost like night and day - Thor in mythology is a grizzly red headed brute who couldn't cares less if he had the throne of Asgard or not, is not particularly charming, cannot fly, and his hammer can be wielded by anybody. Thor in the comics is portrayed as much youthful looking, cocky yet friendly to most, next in line of the throne of Asgard, can fly, and his hammer is enchanted and can only be used by him. Sif is sensitive Thor's golden haired wife in mythology, in the Marvel comic she is a raven haired warrior who has only been Thor's occasional love interest and can handle herself just fine alongside any other male Asgardian soldier. Loki in mythology is not a god but a juton who becomes Odin's blood brother and not of any brotherhood to Thor(in most renditions), has two wives, the giver of birth to Odin's eight-legged steed, is the real Kickstarter to Armageddon, rivals with Heimdall, and is by no means much of a fighter. Loki in the Marvel comic is Thor's step-brother, a prince of Asgard, and has skill in combat...Honestly, we could be here all day with the numerous differences between the comic and the actual mythology. well, all the more reason to call it Fragglerock. If you bastardize, trivialize and infantize one of the most epic myths in human history then you should not call it Ragnaröck - why not call it "Thor clobbers Skathaar". Also, there are countless re-constructions and reinterpretations of the Norse/Germanic mythology, eg in Richard Wagner's Ring Cycle the story plays very different (Götterdämmerung). But always with respect to the source material and it never becomes stupid and irritating down to Valhalla/Asgard being destroyed played as an idiotic joke. You fanboys cry salty rivers when the silly Mandarin gets a clever twist, yet out of sheer cultural ignorance you are indifferent when an entire ancient religion and mythology is desecrated. And lol at Thor a "brute...not charming"…? - Thor was by far the most popular deity of the Norse pantheon, people prayed to him for protection (there are STILL people believing in these Gods). - Thor’s popularity reached its height during the Viking Age (c. 790-1100 CE) at which time he was considered by the Church the greatest rival to Christ;- Thor was the defender of Asgard, realm of the gods, and Midgard, the human realm, and is primarily associated with protection through great feats of arms in slaying giants. - have you ever pondered where THURSday derives from (hint: a God) or in German the same day " Donnerstag" Do yourself a favor and watch something semi-serious for once, like this (campy) history channel doc about Thor: Once again the MARVEL COMIC BOOKS of which the Ragnarok FILM is based on are only LOOSESLY inspired by the actual mythology. Neither Stan Lee or Jack Kirby ever set out to make very true-to-the-source translations into the Marvel universe - Elements and names are used but they are not meant to be taken companion to the actual mythology. Your complaints would be justified if the Ragnarok film was meant to be a direct adaptation of actual mythology, but its not its based on the Marvel comic book and it pays most respect towards the artistic style of Jack Kirby who was the co-originator of the book for the Marvel universe. As such, you should look at it in the lens of it just being a comic book superhero movie, not a religious documentary. And I know my mythology hahfabee, Thor - while a brave and mighty warrior who inspired others and was highly respected, was not exactly squeaky clean and always fair tempered, he drank quite a lot and enjoyed a good fight. Some would call his character a bit brutish based on certain tales. |
|
