Does anyone else feel he's severely misrepresented in the MCU?
Not really.
I mean, if we're talking like...the ORIGINAL, mythological Thor then maybe yeah, that's an age old debate with the Marvel depiction in general.
But as a depiction of his Marvel form? No, it's pretty good.
If this dude can't make him decent, no one can.
He's right up there with Gunn and Russos in the 'quirky and culty' realm, as well as having good control of movie language.
Also, his usual deadpan comments will generate the most idiotic and hilarious headlines.
Here's hoping.
>>82684277
Sort of. The stories they use for him are shit and really not what a good Thor movie should be about, but personality-wise he seems pretty spot on.
He's in shitty movies but not really other than that. There's nothing wrong with doing a superhero romcom but they've done it so poorly.
>>82684277
I'm spitballing here, but maybe it's because his initial personality was based around being arrogant, stubborn, and violent, and his first movie's storyline revolved around outgrowing those traits. So now he has nothing.
Thor as a character has been nailed. Hemsworth is perfect for the role and they write him brilliantly, kind of a mix of Henry V, Brian Blessed, and Superman. It's fantastic.
The trouble is his movies fucking suck because Disney inexplicably thinks we want to see more of Thor's shitty human friends than Thor and his amazing space-magic adventures. Just because I like Kat Dennings' tits doesn't mean I want to see Kat Dennings say stupid shit all the fucking time instead of the Warriors Three.
>>82684277
He seems to lack direction. Personally I'd love for him to go full viking mode. Give him a costume like pic related, have him speak like Thor, fight some mythical beasts, and so on.
>>82684466
This. They tried to do too much Kirby Thor when Simonson Thor is where its at.
>>82684457
He's still fairly arrogant by Av2.
>>82684277
Not really.
Personally, I don't even get /co/'s hatred of his movies. They're competent unlike Incredible Hulk. They're coherent unlike Age of Ultron. They're not full of pointless subplots like Iron Man 2. They don't have an entire act of blatantly bad CGI like First Avenger. Yet for some reason, /co/ will defend those movies and not the Thor movies.
Meh. They aren't amazing movies or even all that memorable. But I'd rather watch them than a good chunk of the MCU.
Why did they tone down everyone's powers in the movies? Why not go all out on visual effects and have retarded shit like Thor destroying planets instead of not even being able to stop a city from falling down even Comic Iron Man is stronger than MCU Thor
>>82684277
character is well done but could get better adventures for his movies.
>>82684604
Thor 1 is legitimately one of my favorite MCU movies. It's stuffed with good actors who give really good performances, you can tell Kenneth Branagh really coaxed some good shit out of Hiddleston and Elba and Skarsgaard. Even Hopkins only phones it in PART of the time. Hemsworth is charming and funny. The environment design and world design and creature design is all great.
I fucking love Thor 1, without irony.
>>82684719
Thor 1 was good. Here's hoping that Ragnarok brings back a little bit of that magic and directional nuance.
>>82684311
My uncle hated Thor when he saw it because of how dislike the mythology it was. Everyone else I know is fine with the Thor films.
I'm Australian though so I guess that biases us a bit towards Hemsworth.
>>82684719
I liked Thor 1, too. It was just campy enough to be enjoyable.
>>82684604
They're annoying because Thor could add some much needed diversity to the MCU by being the mythological movie exploring various realms, and instead they do boring ass shit on Earth all the time.
Honestly Thor 2 is pretty cool
the last battle looked fucking amazing in theaters
when you see all the realms
probably the best visual in all the MCU
>>82684277
his movies are terrible but he's okay in them
it's just everything around him that tends to be shitlikehershlag
>>82684845
The final battle in Thor 2 had some really great visuals. It's just a shame that Malekith was so forgettable that everyone damn near forgot how good that fight actually looked.
Thor 2:The Dark World was amazingly entertaining schlock. The dynamic between Thor and Loki was great, the Asgardian magi-tech was fucking awesome. The Dark Elves designs were wicked and a actually fucking practical. It's precisely what I want more of, hopefully Thor: Ragnarok delivers.
I wasn't expecting something remarkably compelling, it was just a great superhero movie. My only gripe is how underutilized Sif and the Warriors Three are,and where the fuck is Valkyrie?
>>82684604
Thor 2 is pretty bad although I love it anyway.
Thor 1 is one of the best movies in the MCU.
>>82684604
Thor is great!
But The Dark World was terrible.
And Loki fangirls are the worst.
>>82684604
Thor 1 was a good watch.
Scenes like the one in the rain where he plows his way through SHIELD agents and fails to lift the hammer while Coulson watches did a great job of setting up his whole redemption arc and establishing what he cares about and why as he figures that shit out for himself. Those were great scenes.
Thor 2 was just comprised mostly of rapid-fire scene transitions to squeeze in as many jokes as possible and that took away a lot from the (poorly written) drama and just made it go from a story about a serious war/invasion to "Thor and Jane play hopscotch all movie".They didn't even shower her in hot grits.
It was basically a Kamen Rider movie because all the dark elves were helmeted or plastic-faced grunts that did nothing except for that one black guy that had a real face.
I don't know how accurate his portrayal is, but his films are, if not the best, the most comfortable to watch in MCU. Every film is fun in their own way, but with Thor, you can just sort of kick back and enjoy that sort of classic, harmless adventure atmosphere. He's just above mortal angst.
>>82684277
No, he's pretty on point. I think him and Jane is off. The shy way he pursued her just didn't feel right. I would have preferred a Jane that was continually rebuffing his brazen advances to the awkward nervous silence/ we're to adults that are attracted to each other but can't figure out where to go from here. The movies made Darcy seem more likely to fuck him than Jane ever did.
>>82684277
Thor 1 was ok.
Thor 2 was meh.
I wish they went full high fantasy adventure instead of wasting time on Earth.
>>82685318
I feel the same way as this one.
Not that I don't like angst I like it when its done well and its been done well in MCU, but its nice to break from it once in a while.
>>82684604
>competent unlike Incredible Hulk
The fuck are you even talking about
I actually love the first film and have yet to lose the sentiment that it's one of the better self contained movies in the MCU, with Thor having a full character arc and while they're not everyone's favorite part, the parts on Earth at least served a purpose in the context of the movie as an important way to humble Thor. I mean, it's not absolutely amazing but its a good movie.
The second one's just alright, definitely a step down but not the worst the MCU's seen. That's where the Earth scenes kind of stand out as unnecessary (even if a few of the movie's funniest moments were there. I get why we go there fundamentally, to contrast Thor and his whole existence to ours.) and like someone said Thor's story arc's kind of done, at least for now, and the second one was more about Loki really although even in that sense it could have been handled a bit better.
I'm kind of looking forward to Ragnarok, it could give Thor something to do which is what I think was the main weakness of the second film.
>>82684604
>They're competent unlike Incredible Hulk.
Norton Hulk was the best solo Hulk movie we've ever had.That's not a compliment so much as an indictment, though.
I just wish they dropped the romantic comedy aspects for more full on fantansy, also let the asgardians be gods and do mysthical shit, all of the best Thor runs in the comics do it.
