Reviews Comments: Enjoyable, depending on how much you mind the flaws
Enjoyable, depending on how much you mind the flaws
The first thing I want to say is that I did find the film enjoyable when I watched it, despite its flaws. I would even watch it again, with a friend who has not seen it. The visuals are creatively done and the film looks very nice, even though 3D will add NOTHING because it is not true 3D (filmed with 2 cameras) but the cheap converted kind. So, if you can, watch it in 2D. The most important flaw is the story telling and some gaping plot holes. If you go see this, be aware that the story telling is clumsy at times and even though many topics are introduced, few of them are actually given time for a satisfying resolve. The second major flaw I found to be distracting were the transitions. They were done very badly and even took me out of the film sometimes. Then, there is the romance. I understood from the first film, that Thor and Jane liked each other and fell in lust maybe, but they had known each other for what? 3 days? Now we are supposed to believe they are deeply in love, without anything to show us why. The relationship between Thor and Jane is a major focus of the film, so I am disappointed they wouldn't give it more time to develop. Or more Loki. Seriously, for his prominence in the trailer(s) his scene count is rather slim. The motives of our villain are NEVER elaborated upon. Seriously, all we know is that he wants to regain the Aether and bring darkness to the universe, without even telling us what that means, exactly. Are all the suns suddenly snuffed out, or what? Why does he want this? I assumed it was a metaphor for wiping out all other life, but it's NEVER EXPLAINED! If you enjoy watching Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman and Tom Hiddleston without caring too much about the plot, if you enjoy creative visuals, a snarky Loki and some funny lines, go watch it. If not, you may be disappointed. And by the way - the tag line to this film? Total bullshit. "He is forced to sacrifice everything to save us all." Thor sacrifices exactly nothing in this film. SPOILER WARNING! During the battle in Vanaheim, they actually used guns. They have firearms and Asgard is STILL using melée weapons? Later in the film it is shown that Asgard also has artillery, which is NEVER explained. Seriously, what the fuck?! Also, why can MEASUREMENT instruments be used to TELEPORT? How? The ending with Loki as Odin was fucking awesome, though.
The Dark Elves lived in whatever the Marvel Universe deems existed before this universe, so literally destroying creation is basically their way of returning home. Bringing darkness to the universe as far as I could figure out from the film means the destruction of everything in it. But Marvel Mac Guffins always tend to suck. I do think the Jane thing is more of a fault of Thor 1 than Thor 2 though. It was pretty clear by the end of that film that they were Destined Lovers who wanted nothing more than to be together, despite the really short time span
comment #21906 tomwithnonumbers 7th Nov 13
Yeah, the motivation for Malekith et al. remains vague at best. I should mention that I have read zero Thor comics, so I know Malekith is a villain in the comics, but I have no idea what he does there. Maybe they pick up a plot that existed in the comics, but still it would be bad story telling if someone who does not know the source material cannot enjoy the film (*cough* Harry Potter *cough*). I respectfully disagree about the Jane thing being a fault of Thor 1, though. It is true that they established an attraction between the two, but I do not feel they were established as Destined Lovers. If Thor 2 had wanted to, they could have killed the romance and it would have been absolutely plausible. They could also have shown how Thor and Jane get to know each other better and then truly fall in love, but the film opted to do neither of these things.
comment #21916 Panthera 8th Nov 13
That's fair enough, its probable that my low opinion of the first film made me think they were trying (and failing) to show them more in love than was realistic. I do think their scenes together are better here than the first time around, but now I think about it it does feel a bit disjointed and undeserved
comment #21918 tomwithnonumbers 8th Nov 13
I don't know anything about romance and could care less, so maybe you have a point on that part of things. But Thor doesn't exactly sacrifice nothing. His mother was killed. He believes his brother dead, believes that he died having shown that there was good still within him, when Thor had himself said earlier that he thought that goodness was gone. He's lost at least a measure of faith in his father's wisdom, and what he once thought the kingship was supposed to represent.
comment #21920 Dracorex4 8th Nov 13
I'm with panthera here. I love the film and it definitely has consequential character things happening like all those good examples you name, so it's not the films fault the marketing department sucked. But those things you mention aren't sacrifices, because he didn't choose to give them up and he didn't give them up in exchange for anything. Finally some of those events are things that he didn't really have any hand in. If I were to guess, I assume that the marketing department was talking about the whole being exiled from Asgard thing. That's the only thing Thor really gives up in exchange for something else. I suppose he sacrifices kingship for Jane, but that's not to save us
comment #21923 tomwithnonumbers 8th Nov 13
@ tomwithnonumbers I actually liked the first Thor film, but it would have done without cramming in the "love story". It was unnecessary and added nothing. @ Dracorex4 Yes, his mother was killed, yes Loki was killed as far as he knows and yes, he was disillusioned about his fathers wisdom and what it means to be king. But there is a difference between a loss and a sacrifice. Thor did not sacrifice Frigga or Loki. They did not die because he made the decision to let them die in order to save the 9 realms from destruction or darkness or whatever. A line like "he is forced to sacrifice everything to save us all" would have been justified if he had willingly sacrificed Jane and his family to save the rest of Asgard and the other 8 realms. I don't want to say that this would have made the film better, but this is what I would have considered "to sacrifice all".
comment #21926 Panthera 8th Nov 13
Haha, we answered the same thing at the same time ;-) But I agree, the stupid tag line or summary is not the film's fault. I just wanted to mention it, because it raises expectations that are not met by the film itself.
comment #21927 Panthera 8th Nov 13
I think we have to keep in mind that Marvel is perfectly aware of tropes and uses & abuses them to misdirect the audience - starting with the poster tagline. I for one went into this movie having no idea whatsoever about how it was going to end. It did look like Jane was in danger, might not make it, yadda yadda yadda.. not the case. Halfway through I didn't think the end fight was going to be hilarious at times. It was the movie's willingness to wink at itself that made it so great for me.
comment #21989 sakeido 12th Nov 13
I don't think any of the Marvel films are so good that we must assume their mistakes were all done on purpose. I'm not even going to buy that The Avengers was aware that it's MacGuffin was crud but the cosmic order of the universe forbid them from writing a decent MacGuffin, never mind that the marketing team for Thor: The Dark World was aware that their tagline was cliched and irrelevant but decided it improved the experience of every viewer to believe at some point Thor was going to sacrifice something even if he never actually did
comment #22005 tomwithnonumbers 13th Nov 13
Honestly, I see it this way: the sequel could've gone back and tried to fix the Thor/Jane romance and wasted a fuckload of time, or it could've taken it as read that the first one did its job (even though it didn't) and do its best to continue from there. I'm glad they chose the latter.
comment #22089 Wackd 18th Nov 13
They should have ditched the romance altogether, but since they decided to make it a major focus of the film, they might as well have developed it a little instead of expecting us to believe they are sooo in love after knowing each other for 3 days and then not seeing each other for 2 years...
comment #22096 Panthera 18th Nov 13
Chemistry, Panthera. Some couples have it, and while it's YMMV whether they do have it, that's what they're meant to have.
comment #23306 Theenmityofages1994 26th Feb 14
This doesn't really have anything to do with the review itself, but I just wanted to chime in and say that I think this review's title pretty much nails right on the head the movie-going experience. Every movie is flawed, but it can be enjoyed if you're willing to look past those flaws. For me personally, this film entertained me enough that I don't mind the fact that some things don't work. Sure, I wish the Thor/Jane romance had been done better in both movies, sure I wish Malekith had more screentime and backstory, sure I wish we had an explanation for how the Bifrost Bridge is repaired, but you know what? Even without all that, this was a fun movie, and that's good enough for me.
comment #23337 JamesPicard 1st Mar 14
In order to post comments, you need to