Thor

(Movie Review)

            And yet another comic book superhero movie.

            Roger Ebert, in his review of the movie [LINK HERE] lists off a number of reasons why this is a terrible movie. 

            I agree with him on every point he makes.

            And yet I still enjoyed this movie, in spite of all its flaws.

            If you suspend your critical brain functions, and just go with the movie, it can be a fun ride.  Not a classic, certainly, but a fun enough diversion for 90 minutes.

            I think part of the reason I liked this movie was that it was different from all the other superhero movies we’ve had recently.   This goes to the nature of its hero, Thor, who, although he has been in comic books since the 1960s, he was originally stolen straight out of Norse mythology by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby.

            Captain America, The Incredible Hulk , Spider-Man  and Iron Man  all have origin stories that explain how they became superheroes. 

            The Norse god Thor doesn’t have an origin story as such.  The movie starts out with him already fully formed.  Instead, his first story shows how he came to be involved in the affairs of human beings.

            So the movie is divided.  Half of it takes place in the fantastical mythological world, half of it takes place on earth.  This gives the movie a different feel than most other superhero movies. There’s a whole set of characters on earth, but there’s also a whole set of characters in the mythical city of Asgard.

            The negative side of this is that neither setting gets enough screen time to be developed.  But the positive side is that you’re given just enough of a taste of both to keep you interested.  And although you don’t spend enough time in either setting to fully immerse yourself, you also don’t spend enough time in either setting to get bored.

            The actors are all quite good as well.  Thor’s 4 friends on Asgard, although they never get developed into anything more than one note characteristics, all seem to have a twinkle in their eye that make them seem like they might develop into interesting characters if given the chance.

            Same thing on earth.  Natalie Portman’s character never gets developed, but she’s still charming and appealing enough in her small role. 

            The movie never fleshes out any of its characters or settings, but it never let me get bored either.  So I rate this movie as very easily watchable, and just as easily forgettable.

ON CONTINUITY

            This movie picks up a lot of the strands from Iron Man 2.  (The post credit teaser of Iron Man 2 led directly into Thor, and Agent Phil Coulson plays a significant role in both movies.  Tony Stark is also mentioned by name.) 

            And many of the plot threads and characters from this movie are going directly into the Avengers movie.

           

            Although I know some people are cynical about big franchises like this, I think it’s kind of cool to try and transfer the inter-connected world of the comic books to the big screen.

            It does, however, make it hard to evaluate any of these movies on their own.

            Perhaps part of the reason I judged this movie so kindly was because it was part of a franchise I was enjoying, and the good will carried over?  Would I have hated it if it had been a stand alone movie?

            Some of the scenes on Asgard reminded me a little of some of the cheesy space operas from the 1980s (Flash Gordon, Dune, Krull, and the like)—movies that had really tested my patience back in the day.  But for whatever reason, I liked Thor.  Double standard?  Maybe.

Link of the Day

On Gaza & the 2 Positives of Election 2012: The Worst Didn't Happen & It's Over

Thor: Movie Review (Scripted)