• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

THOR: Grading, Discussion, Review **SPOILERS***

What grade do you give THOR?

  • A+

    Votes: 25 12.2%

  • A

    Votes: 48 23.4%

  • A-

    Votes: 49 23.9%

  • B+

    Votes: 33 16.1%

  • B

    Votes: 24 11.7%

  • B-

    Votes: 9 4.4%

  • C+

    Votes: 5 2.4%

  • C

    Votes: 6 2.9%

  • C-

    Votes: 1 0.5%

  • D+

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • D

    Votes: 2 1.0%

  • D-

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • F

    Votes: 3 1.5%
  • Total voters
    205
  • Poll closed .
Thor stopped tracking prior to Labor Day weekend. I would have thought that despite being in under 100 theaters they would've left it out for Labor Day weekend.

Thor finished it's domestic run with $181m
Thor finished it's worldwide run with $448.5m

Would've been nice to get to a nice worldwide figure of $450m but now that can be a goal for the sequel to pass. The film had a healthy run of 112 days/16 weeks in release.

For a film that found early haters and trash talk of campy He-Man film Thor got the 2011 summer off to a solid start. Thor only leads it's stable mate Captain America by $10m and may yet be surpassed. However, as of now Thor is the comic book superhero film of the summer.
 
Picked up the DVD today. The deleted scenes had a lot of good stuff with the Warriors Three. I love them in the comics and didn't think the movie really defined them very well other than just being friends of Thor. The deleted stuff shows them as much more defined and recognizable.
 
I saw the film just recently, and really enjoyed it! I don't think it was the perfect superhero movie by any means, and I don't know if it will stand up to repeat viewings, but it was entertaining at the very least. I think the strong characters made up for what was a pretty weak plot.

Well, except for Kat Dennings. She was amusing in spots, but when will film makers learn that characters who exist only for comic relief are annoying! Especially when they spout pop culture references that will immediately date your film!
 
I think the movie would've been better with more scenes of Thor on Earth and actually coming to care for it. That was too rushed.
 
I liked the movie but it would have been neat to see a scenario where he was banished to Earth at the end of the movie and have the sequel pick it up from there with him living as Donald Blake.

Not that I'm complaining about what we got but I think it could have been interesting.
 
Well, it would have had to be in Avengers since it appears to be the next story chronologically for everybody.
 
I got the DVD and watched it last night. It's just as good as the 3 theatrical viewings I made.

Of the deleted scenes the one I really wish they'd left in was the one of Frigga and Odin as she confronts him about Thor's banishment. It wasn't a lengthy scene and it also, imo, tightened the family dynamic.

The others, especially of Loki and Thor talking pre-ceremony, really would've made for a long opening.
 
I'm hoping the sequel explains some of the confusion and inconsistencies in the film.

For example, they never explain adequately Thor's age. Is he really hundreds of years old? If so, why does he still act like an inexperienced dolt? Or does time move slower in Asgard? In either case, it makes a romance between Thor and an Earth woman seem rather problematic!

I'm surprised this isn't something the movie even bothered explaining.
 
TremblingBluStar said:
I'm hoping the sequel explains some of the confusion and inconsistencies in the film.

For example, they never explain adequately Thor's age. Is he really hundreds of years old? If so, why does he still act like an inexperienced dolt? Or does time move slower in Asgard? In either case, it makes a romance between Thor and an Earth woman seem rather problematic!

I'm surprised this isn't something the movie even bothered explaining.
Click to expand...

Because it doesn't matter and this is the first I've ever heard of this complaint.

He's a young and immature person to the gods. 1000 or 27, it doesn't matter.

I've never, for example, worried when watching Highlander that "oh no, he's hundreds of years old, what's he doing with someone younger than him!"

And the problems that COULD come from that didn't need to be addressed in the first movie. It wasn't a necessary theme. Among all the other problems, ie, he's the prince of a land in a far off place and dimension.
 
The comics are the same, actually. It's always been unclear how old they all are supposed to be.

Then again, maybe having such long ages may mean they have longer periods of adolescence and mental development.
 
So, is there any reason why the Asgardians can't repair the Rainbow bridge and rebuild the Bifrost?

I got the impression that they considered them gone for good at the end of the movie.
 
SalvorHardin said:
So, is there any reason why the Asgardians can't repair the Rainbow bridge and rebuild the Bifrost?

I got the impression that they considered them gone for good at the end of the movie.
Click to expand...

Whenever Bifrost was damaged in the comics it normally took Odin to replace it, It wasn't built per say and it'll probably be fixed in the Avengers movie somehow.
 
I'd hardly describe Thor at the beginning of the movie as "inexperienced"...he was clearly a seasoned warrior. He was just proud, rash, arrogant, and other sorts of things that adults can be. He didn't have Odin's insight and wisdom.
 
The Old Mixer said:
I'd hardly describe Thor at the beginning of the movie as "inexperienced"...he was clearly a seasoned warrior. He was just proud, rash, arrogant, and other sorts of things that adults can be. He didn't have Odin's insight and wisdom.
Click to expand...

Maybe that was a bad word to describe him. It was just unclear whether this is the same Thor from Earth legend. He never mentions going to Earth that I can recall.

Plus, and I have heard this complaint, why were they all surprised when Loki, the god of lies, betrayed them.
 
It isn't that Bifrost is irreparable, it's that the odds are it will take a long time (even by Asgardian standards) to fix it and by then Thor's Earth friends will be long dead.
 
How was it unclear that it was the Thor from Norse mythology? The movie made it pretty clear that they were indeed meant to be the Norse gods in every sense of our perception of them. Thor when he encounters Jane, Darcy, and Dr. Selvig he says he's on Earth (this was in the trailer scene) showing a clear knowledge of Earth or Midgard as the Asgardians call us.

If they were surprised at Loki's actions at all...it was most likely for dramatic story purposes. Just as it is for story purposes that it isn't necessary to establish the God's ages while they're in Midgard.
 
My problem with Thor being thousands of years old is don't you think he would've been married by now? With kids? With grandkids? And so on and so forth? I kind of prefer the theory that time goes more slowly on Asgard, kind of like the reverse of Narnia.
 
How long will Thor live? What's the rush on the time scale of even many thousands of years, if he'll live for eons? Maybe he had a godlike amount of wild oats to sow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top