Like I said, I'm still excited to see Thor Ragnarok. I was just imagining an epic battle for the fate of Asgard, not necessarily following the myths (since Marvel's Thor in the comics dropped a lot of the actual norse myth stuff and just kept some of the good things and added a lot of its own, and all for the better in my opinion). That said, I'd like to see them fighting Hela and a giant wolf and all the other end of days Norse stuff. It seems like the perfect way to end Thor as a solo series (I don't mean he'd lose ragnarok, just that it would be a good way to end the solo films). But it still seems like it could easily end up being the best Thor movie, and its the MCU movie I most want to see in 2017. Its more like I'm lamenting the missed opportunity then actually irritated or put off by the movie it seems to be. I'm sure it will be fun, and seeing Hulk get a (presumably) somewhat bigger role in this then he gets in the avengers movies is cool. Also, Loki is one of the few really entertaining MCU villains, and I can't wait to see what he does. So, overall I'm staying positive, with a bit of disappointment over what could have been that won't taint my opinion of the final product.
True, regarding Jane Foster. Of course, the lack of interest is assuaged, in large part, by the fact Natalie Portman is Jane (well, it does for me, anyway).
Just in terms of storytelling, Thor is immortal, Jane is not. At some point it has to end, or else Odin steps in and approves, and does something mystical for Jane. It doesn't upset me if Portman isn't interested. I love the movies because of what Hemsworth brings to role. The others are supporting actors/characters and I'm not dissing them, but Hemsworth does an amazing job. Give him a good script and a good director and you have my price of admission.
Well, despite previous reports to the contrary, Portman is not saying "no" to future appearances as Jane.
Personally, I like Jane Foster and her relationship with Thor. And if it ends, it ends. But if Marvel wanted the relationship to end that badly, they could have hired another actress to portray Jane, so that we can see it happen on screen. I get the feeling that we're going to be "told" about the break-up . . . which is what Marvel did with Tony and Pepper.
Glad to hear Portman is open to coming back as Jane, I liked her in the first two Thor movies. I wonder if she would be interested playing the current version of the character in the comics.
I'm actually a little torn on this news. On the one hand, I love Natalie Portman and Jane was an enjoyable character (and I'm one of the few people who loved Kat Dennings as Darcy), but on the other hand, the biggest thing that I'm most excited about Ragnarok is how it's largely focusing on Asgard and the greater galaxy beyond Earth. I'm a big fan of Norse Mythology, and while I don't expect the film to follow closely to the those stories, I enjoy them maintaining at the least of those myths. I'm further interested in the otherworldliness the film will bring, much like Guardians of the Galaxy. But, perhaps as JD suggests, maybe they'll follow the recent comics regarding Jane which will allow the character to reasonably exist beyond Earth.
I think the comment's pretty clear. The Winter Soldier changed the landscape by dismantling SHIELD, and clearing the way for Hydra, so Ragnarok will change it by smashing Asgard, thus clearing the way for Thanos.
I think the only thing that's clear is Ragnarok will be a game changer and perhaps in an unexpected fashion. Anything else is open to interpretation. One interpretation is, as you said, Asgard being "smashed" thus clearing the way for Thanos, but another interpretation might be something we won't see coming. Besides, does Asgard need "smashing" for Thanos to succeed and is that really even a game changer in the first place?
Spoiler: Thor fights who? Thor is forced to fight the Hulk in gladiatorial combat. My speculation/prediction is that Hulk will come close to winning but Thor will appeal to him and they will break free together from the gladiatorial arena and join forces to save Asgard.
Whatever happened to the days when Thor was able to wipe the floor with the Hulk? Is it really that important to Marvel that the Hulk is potrayed as this all powerful being? Or that only science - in the name of Stark's Hulkbuster - is able to defeat him?
Which days? Almost every comic (going back to Journey Into Mystery purposely being vague about the winner )has them tying, with a few times in either title showing the titular hero as the winner.
Same with the Hulk battling the Thing. They more or less always drew to a tie or someone barely won. Here is a video to demonstrate what I'm talking about... Spoiler: Big Fight
The way the Hulk has been portrayed in the Avengers movies, I don't see how Thor could beat him unless he has his magic hammer, Mjolnir. At least in the movies, Mjolnir seems to be the only thing that really makes Thor powerful. Apparently the answer is yes based on the recent Avengers movies.
Exactly. Back in the day, they were routinely portrayed as being equal in strength, with them famously fighting to a draw during the first Avengers-Defenders crossover back in the seventies.
First we have Captain America 3 transforming into an Avengers film. Now we have Thor 3, which features the Hulk as a co-lead and Spider-man with Iron Man making more than a cameo appearance. How long is this pattern going to last in the MCU?