Thor: Ragnarök (Film Review)

[selenak]

Though not much of one. I mean, I was entertained and amused, but all in all, like the first Guardian of the Galaxy movie (still haven't watched the second one), it was too jokey for me. And it took me a while to get beyond the first scene where Thor seems to have exchanged vocabulary with Tony Stark (they tone it down afterwards) (and even had a non-verbal joke stolen from Iron Man 3). Even taking into account he's spent a lot of time on Earth by now, that felt inconsistent.

(Otoh, it was consistent with general Marvel use of mythology that this movie's villain, Hella - because apparantly "Hel" won't do? - had as much in common with the Norse goddess Hel as Loki, Odin and Thor have with their namesakes, which is to say, not much, and she's got a completley different perdigree, too. Otoh, Cate Blanchett who plays her wasn't, like poor Christopher Eccleston in the last Thor movie, buried beneath prosthetics and make-up and got to do slinky villainy, so that was fun.)

Still: as I said, I was entertained. It was as advertised, colourful, funny, the whole Asgard family soap got to a satisfying (to me) conclusion, and for all my nitpicking about mythology, this is the first movie (if you ignore Thor's arrival in Avengers with a bolt of lightning) which actually puts Thor's mythic powers to good use. And for all that the use of both Hulk and Bruce Banner generally goes with the comic tone of the movie, I thought it did get across that Bruce being horrified by the realisation he's spent two full years as the Hulk and that if he transforms one more time, he might lose his Bruce-self entirely was no laughing matter. Oh, and since for Bruce post Hulk-to-Banner tranformation this is the first time he recovers consciousness since Sokovia, him asking after Natasha first thing pleased my inner MCU continuity demand. Mind you: Bruce/Natasha was treated with more seriousness than Thor/Jane, which was dealt with in a comic one liner. I mean, I get that Natalie Portman didn't want to play Jane anymore, and I don't have strong feelings about that romance one way or another, but still, it was jarring.

Of the new characters, Valkyrie (I'm told she's not just any Valkyrie but Brunnhild? Who again hasn't got much in common with the mythological one other than having exiled herself and having issues) was fab, Jeff Goldblum had a blast as the Grand Master, and Hella's temporary sidekick Scourge even got a mini character arc of his own. (Which was more than Hella got who was simply there to provide menace, but hey.) And if Thor: The Dark World actually managed to sell me on Thor and Loki as siblings who grew up together and had mutually conflicted feelings (as opposed to just Loki hating Thor and Thor loving Loki, which was the impression the first Thor movie and Avengers left me with), Thor: Ragnarök at last made me fond of that particular sibling relationship. It helps that no one pretends Loki is actually competent at evil overlording, though. Not because of his hidden inner goodness, but because his speciality is messing things up, not building and ruling. Oh, and you could tell Anthony Hopkins was having the time of his life in his brief stint as Loki-playing-Odin. It certainly gave him more to do, acting wise, than Marvel's take on Odin generally does. Though Real!Odin's farewell scene with his sons was, dare I say, touching, complete with giving Loki what he's always wanted - put on the same level as Thor in terms of paternal love and being praised, wryly, for his (spell) skills. The first Thor movie had both Thor and Loki start out as emotional teenagers, and Thor then subsequently grew up which Loki did not, but this latest movie, for all its determined comedy, provided the hope he just might now.

(Another thing that helps: Thor by now being able to anticipate all of Loki's inevitable backstabing attempts. Thor: The Dark World was the first time he could and this pleasing trend continues.)

Alas, though, aside from the family soap opera, no other relationships of Thors are treated seriously. I mean, this is a movie in which by implication all of his close friends that he spent centuries with get killed. Granted, we don't see Sif die on screen, but we did see the Warriors Three, but leaving Doylist reasons aside, Sif's very absence in the final battle to me certainly means she died during Hella's takeover of Asgard as well. Even if not, it's what Thor has to believe after his return. And the movie gives him zilch acknowledgment or reaction. I already mentioned the way the break-up with Jane is reduced to a one liner. It's as if there was some editorial fiat that there must be absolutely no brooding in this movie and it should not be anything but funny, presumably as a counterpoint to Civil War? Which leaves me seeing the movie as the Chinese fortune cookie of Marvel movies: it's fun to consume, but there really isn't much inside.


Trivia:

- it fits inter Avengers relationships that Thor refers to "Stark" while Bruce refers to him as "Tony" (and apparantly noticed the tight fit of his trousers)

- yeah, okay, I'm still in stitches about the statue and the play

- if anyone is mourning Thor's long hair because of the trailer, he doesn't lose it until ca. 20 or even 30 minutes into the movie

- if this takes place two years after Age of Ultron, and the Steven Strange movie starts simultanously with the end of Civil War (since one of the cases Stephen Strange declines at the start is Rhodey's), how come Strange in his cameo here is already all routine about his powers?

Comments

[the_rck]

I have a suspicion that changing Hel to Hella has more to do with Hel sounding the same as Hell which, at least in the US, is both a word kids can get into trouble for saying and a word with religious significance for some people.

[selenak]

That's quite likely, yes.

[kore]

if anyone is mourning Thor's long hair because of the trailer, he doesn't lose it until ca. 20 or even 30 minutes into the movie

....oooh! (No seriously, I HATE the short haired Thor look.)

I'm probably going to see this because it comes out in the US on my birthday, and it looks fun and colourful, and Valkyrie and Hel look neat and I really liked What We Do in the Shadows. But it looks....so goofy. I'm so not thrilled about Jane and Sif being tossed, either, it's an unfortunate trend with Marvel movies that apparently the actresses want more money and get shut out.


(But really, I sat through Constantine for Tilda Swinton, I can sit through Thor 3 for Cate Blanchett)

[selenak]

Not having watched Constantine, I can't compare the ratio, but there's ample Cate Blanchett in Thor 3, and it is a fun film to relax with. None of my nitpicks are meant to deny that.

[trobadora]

I read your review prior to watching the film, and I'm glad I was forewarned about the jokeyness. Having now seen the film - oh dear God, they buried everything that might have lent it some gravitas or emotional weight or, hell, any kind of substance under a mountain of jokes. Underneath it all you can just about see the shape of a movie that could have had some serious oomph, and that makes it even more disappointing to me than the jokeyness of Guardians of the Galaxy, which never does have even that much.

[selenak]

Yes, like I said, it felt like there was an editorial fiat: This movie must be funny. It must not be anything else. And it was funny, I wasn't bored for a minute, but - it's just a frothy confection with no substance beneath. Not that the Thor movies used to be Shakespeare, but, well, just compare how Frigga's death was handled in 2 versus pretty much three quarters of Asgard dying here.

[trobadora]

Yeah, it was perfectly entertaining and most of the jokes were fine, but damn. Now I want someone to write an AU version of this that removes about 90% of the jokes, makes everyone's attitude 90% less flippant, and gives proper weight to the seriousness of what happens. *sighs*

[selenak]

They should keep the statue and the play, though. That must stay.:)

(Seriously, Loki as a soulmate of Jonathan and Andrew of BTVS fame at last gives me access to the character.)

A non-jokey, straight version of this story might feel like the final episode of s4 of Sherlock, though, what with the sudden sister taking over and putting everyone through hell, and I'm told most of Sherlock fandom disliked that one?

[trobadora]

I'm the wrong person to talk to about the Sherlock episode, since I loved it myself, and have long stopped listening to what the fandom likes or doesn't like. Too much "if there's no canon Sherlock/John the show is inherently bad" ...

I wouldn't want to take out all the jokes, and the play was great at both being a joke and conveying Loki characterisation. I just don't want the plot buried under witty one-liners, you know?

[selenak]

Well, you know my thing for messed up family stories. The addition of Eurus as the third sibling worked for me and the actress was great (and versatile, see her playing Faith and Watson's doctor as well), I'm just annoyed that Moffat & Co. went out of their way to make the Holmes parents non-complicit in order to keep them as lovable normal, and shift the entire responsibility for the Eurus situation on Mycroft (and the never seen Uncle Rudy), which, come on. Leaving aside Mycroft was 13 when Eurus was disappeared: in order for Sherlock to truly not remember her and remember his friend as a dog, his parents would have had to remove any photos showing either Eurus or Victor, and would have to censor their conversation to never ever mention her. Or Victor as a child.


I just don't want the plot buried under witty one-liners, you know?

I hear you. I would like to see this version of the movie, too.

[trobadora]

The actress was really excellent! I really need to watch more of her work.

I'm not sure the intention was to exculpate the Holmes parents - in particular that scene where Mrs Holmes blames him seemed to me to paint her as unreasonable, and to sympathise a great deal with Mycroft. My own impression is that the parents were completely overwhelmed, and when little Sherlock began to repress what had happened they thought it might be best to let him.

[davetheanalyzer]

From what I learned from interviews and comments about the director of this film, Taika Watiti, a lot of the humor seems to come from his style more than any editorial fiat (Though maybe it was mutual both for him and the people in charge?). I also did hear he wanted to take Thor in a different direction, taking influence from some eighties films and the comics. Apparently more than half of the movie was ad-libbed, with presumably the script acting as more of a rough map than anything.

I'm sad Jane and company aren't around, though the most I can picture of their role during the gladiator planet sequence is them being kind of bumbling around trying to figure out to help, being mistaken for tourists, and taking selfies with some of the aliens or warriors are either confused, annoyed, or really come into it (i think Darcy might initiate that last action?). It's sad Sif also isn't there but apparently that's because the actress couldn't make it because of scheduling conflicts. I heard some word of god that says that she was exiled out of Asgard, so at least there's hope she still lives.

Still, the trailers for this movie did peak my interest and were fun, though I can understand why it might turn some people off from what I hear. Still, I look forward to seeing it when it comes out in the States.