Cool swords
Thor: Ragnarok
- Thread starter Skywalker
- Start date
What does the Hulk need with a puny helmet? 
Doctor Strange will be in "Ragnarok"
http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/799033-doctor-strange-thor-ragnarok#/slide/1
http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/799033-doctor-strange-thor-ragnarok#/slide/1
Not surprising, but good to know it's confirmed.
I had forgotten both Jeff Goldblum and Sam Neil are in this film. I sure hope they share a scene together.
I had forgotten both Jeff Goldblum and Sam Neil are in this film. I sure hope they share a scene together.
I'm glad it will be less than 2 years before we see Strange again.
It was nearly inevitable that Strange would appear in Thor given the post credits scene of Thor visiting Strange and him offering to help find Odin.
I like how they are apparently building the foundations of World War Hulk but i am wondering what this means for Ragnarok. That myth means the end of the Norse gods and it's their exclusive myth.. how WW Hulk fits into this is anyone's guess but i fear it will dilute Thor's story and be just a bridge movie for WW Hulk which is a disservice to such a popular character (even if i place the Thor movies rather in the bottom half of all Marvel movies).
It's still entirely up in the air as to whether they're building the foundations for WWH at all. It's equally possible that Thor Ragnarok's scenes with gladiator hulk will be the only part of WWH that actually makes it into the mcu.
In either case, Ragnarok was already claimed (by Marvel) to be 'the Winter Soldier of phase 3', as in the major gamechanger, so I doubt we really need to worry about it being diluted.
I actually liked the other two Thor movies (although I consider TDW to be the weakest movie in the MCU), but I was really excited when this movie was announced to finally get a Thor movie where the focus was where it should have been from the beginning, on Asgard and the norse mythology type stuff. No boring Jane Foster or her irritating comedy relief friend wasting screen time, just Asgardian awesomeness. But, we're not getting that. We're getting World War Hulk, but they added Thor and call it Thor: Ragnarok so that Universal doesn't get to distribute it. Don't get me wrong, I'm one of the (seemingly few) people who really enjoyed The Incredible Hulk film and I want another Hulk movie, but not in place of a real Asgard based Thor movie.
The more they reveal about this movie, the more I think this will has less to do with Asgard then either of the first two movies, and that is so hard to do I'm almost impressed. Since Hemsworth seems to not want to do any solo Thor films after this, and possibly no more Marvel movies at all after the next Avengers film or two, I really wish they weren't wasting his last solo movie on making a stealth Hulk movie. I'll still watch it and I'm sure I'll enjoy it, and its still the MCU movie I'm most looking forward to next year. I just wish we were actually getting a real Thor: Ragnarok movie. Well, maybe in 20 years when its all rebooted we'll finally get a Thor movie that focuses on the character and Asgard, not humans or Earth or other Marvel heroes
The more they reveal about this movie, the more I think this will has less to do with Asgard then either of the first two movies, and that is so hard to do I'm almost impressed. Since Hemsworth seems to not want to do any solo Thor films after this, and possibly no more Marvel movies at all after the next Avengers film or two, I really wish they weren't wasting his last solo movie on making a stealth Hulk movie. I'll still watch it and I'm sure I'll enjoy it, and its still the MCU movie I'm most looking forward to next year. I just wish we were actually getting a real Thor: Ragnarok movie. Well, maybe in 20 years when its all rebooted we'll finally get a Thor movie that focuses on the character and Asgard, not humans or Earth or other Marvel heroes
I wouldn't necessarily read too much into the title. After all the "age" of Ultron lasted for about 72 hours, Thor "The Dark World" have little to nothing to do with said world itself, Captain America's "civil war" consisted on a couple of (very cool) punch-ups involving about a dozen people and I think it's a foregone conclusion that the upcoming "infinite" war will in fact be decidedly finite...and possibly not an actual war either.
Haven't read the original story, but was Infinity war ever an actual war to begin with? I thought it was just Thanos killing everyone, which is likely to be exactly what it will be onscreen.
Who said that and where?
I think it was in the Phase Three announcement.
The comment's vague enough to mean more or less anything, so I'm not going to overthink it.
The comment's vague enough to mean more or less anything, so I'm not going to overthink it.
It's actually Planet Hulk, not WW Hulk that they are taking elements from. Based on everything I've heard I see to potential two story lines. Either Thor goes off into the wider galaxy for some reason, and along the way ends up on Sakaar, where he gets thrown into the arena with Hulk. They end up escaping and go off on to finish Thor's quest was together.
Or they set off on the quest together and end up on Sakaar and then in the arena together for a while, before escaping and continuing on their quest.
I really don't see that much of Planet Hulk actually making it into the movie outside of Hulk (and Thor) fighting in the arena on Sakaar.
From everything I've heard it's going to be a buddy movie with Hulk and Thor going off on an adventure together, so I think if anything they're going to be either equal or maybe we'll see at least a bit more of an emphasis on Thor. So far Marvel has pretty good about keeping the focus on the title character. Even though Civil War spread the focus a bit, Cap was still very much the primary figure in the story, with a lot of it still focused on his actions and reactions, and his relationship with Bucky.I actually liked the other two Thor movies (although I consider TDW to be the weakest movie in the MCU), but I was really excited when this movie was announced to finally get a Thor movie where the focus was where it should have been from the beginning, on Asgard and the norse mythology type stuff. No boring Jane Foster or her irritating comedy relief friend wasting screen time, just Asgardian awesomeness. But, we're not getting that. We're getting World War Hulk, but they added Thor and call it Thor: Ragnarok so that Universal doesn't get to distribute it. Don't get me wrong, I'm one of the (seemingly few) people who really enjoyed The Incredible Hulk film and I want another Hulk movie, but not in place of a real Asgard based Thor movie.
The more they reveal about this movie, the more I think this will has less to do with Asgard then either of the first two movies, and that is so hard to do I'm almost impressed. Since Hemsworth seems to not want to do any solo Thor films after this, and possibly no more Marvel movies at all after the next Avengers film or two, I really wish they weren't wasting his last solo movie on making a stealth Hulk movie. I'll still watch it and I'm sure I'll enjoy it, and its still the MCU movie I'm most looking forward to next year. I just wish we were actually getting a real Thor: Ragnarok movie. Well, maybe in 20 years when its all rebooted we'll finally get a Thor movie that focuses on the character and Asgard, not humans or Earth or other Marvel heroes
Yeah, based on TWS and Civil War I'm sure the character in the title (Thor, in this case) will get the focus over Hulk. I just wish we were getting a real story about Thor and Asgard dealing with Ragnarok, and that definitely won't be happening if Hulk has a role in the story. Really, I wish they hadn't called it Ragnarok. Without the expectations attached to that title, I'd just be excited to see a Thor/Hulk movie. But, once they bring up Ragnarok but don't deliver, its irritating. I'm still really excited for it, it will be probably be my favorite MCU movie of 2017 (that's basically guaranteed, given that the MCU is having a bit of a weak year this year when it comes to the movie line up). The title just makes me wish we were getting an epic movie about the ultimate battle in Asgard.
It's perhaps worth noting that "Age of Ultron" bore little or no resemblance to the comics storyline of the same name (which involved Wolverine and the Invisible Woman going back in time to assassinate Hank Pym!), and "Civil War" only borrowed a few concepts from the original comic-book version and went somewhere else with it (while introducing the Black Panther and the new Spider-Man). So, at this point, I wouldn't assume that "Ragnarok" is anything more than a cool title, let alone that the movie is going to be faithful to the original Norse myths.
My advice: just go along with the ride and not read too much into the title.
And it breaks my heart that Darcy isn't coming back. She was a hoot in the first two movies. (Jane Foster, on the other hand, is another issue; she was always the least interesting character in the THOR movies.)
My advice: just go along with the ride and not read too much into the title.
And it breaks my heart that Darcy isn't coming back. She was a hoot in the first two movies. (Jane Foster, on the other hand, is another issue; she was always the least interesting character in the THOR movies.)
The movie Age of Ultron was more an adaptation of the 1998 Avengers story Ultron Unlimited. The standard fare of Ultron attacking the Avengers and the showdown being in a East European country. The biggest differences would be the roster of Avengers and Ultron contacting the Avengers to tell them his location, AFTER he's already wiped out the populace of the East European city.
