Escape to the Movies: Thor: The Dark World

[Piorn]

Loved the movie, but seriously, enough with the 3D!
And a big screen doesn't make up for framerate or resolution either.
These movies aren't even shown in 2D anymore where I live, and being forced to pay double the price for a blurry mess and a headache is just a ripoff.
If they had at least done the hobbit thing where you can actually see what's going on while the camera moves, but noooo, scenes are too expensive, let's sneak in several seconds of motion blur on the entire screen, people won't notice the movie stopped.
Love the movie, but I've come to loathe cinema.

 

[walsfeo]

I wonder if some of the "fat" scenes were taken out this time because it felt like there was too much of that kind of thing in the first one?

Edit to add: Thanks for the insight on the 3d being added for China?

 

[Psychobabble]

They really need to pick who the hell Jane Foster is supposed to be and just stick with that. If she isn't a perfect example of a Anita Sarkeesian trope I don't know what is.

And now it looks like they are leading up to a freaking love rivalry between Foster and Sif. That plot device has been hackneyed and tired since the craptastic 80s hack and slash film Ator. Or even Archie comics. So I guess no matter how smart, strong, talented, or independent women get in these films, they still turn into slavering dogs fighting over the scraps when an Alpha Male walks among them. Hooray for social progress.

 

[Leonardo Huizar]

*SPOILER* The theater i went to see this filled up the whole place with laughter during the Captain America cameo

 

[irishda]

I think I agree with you, Bob. Definitely grade-A stuff, (Especially the last fight scene), but it could use some padding.

That was the biggest problem with the first one too. Thor completely reverses his character in a whole weekend. This had a different director too. And considering those were major issues with the other Marvel movies (with the exception of the Iron Man series and Hulk), I wonder if they'll ever get them right.

 

[Mahoshonen]

Bob, I feel sorry that you had to watch the 3D version. I made the mistake of watching Avengers in 3D, and it made my eyes hurt

 

[The Great JT]

I need to see this yesterday.

 

[Gizmo1990]

I saw it in iMax last night. HOLY SHIT!!!

Some movies are really not meant to be in 3D. This is a fast paced, hard action movie. So, instead of enjoying the spectacle of "Wow, this is bigger than life" I just got a bit sick.

I thought the movie was pretty damn awesome though. Like I said, it's a fast paced, hard action movie, and it so much delivers on that. I'm going to have to watch it again in a theater where I can sort of take in what's going on more easily.

Also, can anyone explain to me the post credits reveal...please? This was a part where no one pretended to know what was going on...

Spoiler

The infinity Gems are powerfull objects, each granting insane powers but if you get all 6 and place them in the Infinity Gauntlet then you basicly have the power to reshape the universe as you see fit. As for the Collecter he is an Eldar (Immortal, last member of an extinct race from the begining of the universe) who can sometimes see the future. A long time ago he saw a coming cataclysm that would cause untold destruction to the universe so he began collecting valuable and powerful objects,people ect... in order to keep them safe but after doing it for so long the power he has collected has corrupted him.

As for the movie I saw it on day of release over here (UK got it 30th Nov. Too bad Americans) and I loved it. I think it is the best of the marvel movies (except for the Avengers) and I have to say I feel bad for anyone who saw that in 3D. I saw it in 2d and it was epic but the action did seem far too fast to work in 3d without it being filmed in 3d.

 

[Falseprophet]

BUT WHAT IS WITH THE TERRIBLE VILLAINS!

Seriously both this and IM3 have the most boring and dull bad guys ever. I really hope they can improve there villains in future MCU films because 2013 has been a total flop in delivering interesting and threatening villains (outside of the trailers anyway).

I think Marvel in general has a lack of decent villains. The villains have the been the weak link in almost all their movies. It hasn't been a dealbreaker, because most Marvel heroes are about overcoming their personal issues and flaws than fighting bad guys, but it can keep those films an inch away from greatness. And they're certainly not helped by the rights to their most interesting villains being in the hands of other studios. After Magneto, Doctor Doom, and the better members of Spider-Man's rogue's gallery, who's actually decent for Marvel? The only interesting one has been Loki, and how much of that is because of Tom Hiddleston?

Agreed about how hurried the film is and the need for a longer cut, especially from the scene you mentioned. That could have been a really fantastic scene.

Surprised you didn't mention how boring Malaketh was as a villain. He only really talks to any of the characters like... twice. Really seems like kind of a waste of hiring Christopher Eccleston when you can barely tell it's him. I wouldn't have known if I hadn't sat through the credits for the bonus scene(which was awesome).

I read an Eccleston interview somewhere where he implies he's in a couple hours of footage that weren't used. So an extra vote for that extended version from me.

 

[Doclector]

Nice review as always. I'm mainly commenting however, on how moviebob's earlier thoughts about the avengers are coming true. We're seeing what essentially amounts to our first large scale multi character continuity in movies, and it's interesting to see how the industry, especially critics (even including moviebob who predicted this) dealing with it as it becomes increasingly complex. I wonder if there may come a time when the movies suffer because of audiences and critics alike struggling to keep up. Hell, what if it even becomes a challenge for the writers and directors to stick to the avengers canon? We've had multiple characters having their own movies/shows from the same franchise before, doctor who being a prime example, but we haven't had one that was set up towards a big crossover movie, and what's more, to continue the individual characters on from that crossover.

 

[daxterx2005]

They've already been confirmed as "Sprixies" not "subcons" Sorry, Bob.

 

[Darth_Payn]

BTB, I think you forgot to make a pun unless there's something about "Game Over" that worked for Thor as well as Ender.

Also, you really think that's where they're going with Princess "Not Peach so we can have Peach be playable"?

So it wasn't just me who thought that was odd. It's more fitting to have it say "Dork World" or "Hammer Head" or anything to do with the movie.

 

[Falterfire]

Personally I thought the stinger at the end with the Collector looked like something out of Doctor Who. Seriously, if that was the opening sequence in an episode of Doctor Who I wouldn't think there was anything at all out of place.

 

[K12]

Is the giant laser canoes thing a real because that might be my new favourite thing in the world.

 

[Sanunes]

I actively skip any movie I have to see in 3D, even the movies that were made for 3D seem "off" to me so I feel your pain when forced to watch a converted movie on a bad projector.

Hopefully the movie will still be in theaters when I have time to see it, for I have more interest in this then most of the movies that were released over the summer.

 

[Salad Is Murder]

I would like to say that I really enjoyed this movie, because I did. But I can't fully endorse it for one reason.

WHERE. IS. MY. BETA. RAY. BILL.

 

[TheSchaef]

I agree with Kumagawa. Whether or not the Marvel villains themselves are particularly noteworthy, the people they have cast in the villanous roles have all been top-notch. They just need to throw in Benedict Cumberbatch, Gary Oldman, and Liam Neeson and they can pretty much print their own money with their villains.

And I couldn't agree more with Bob re: 3D. For the extra 4-5 bucks for the glasses, times two since I normally go with the wife, I try to only go to 3D films specifically to see that film in 3D.

That has been a short list, comprised of Avatar, TRON: Legacy, and Hugo. This year's selection may be Gravity.

I have seen other movies in 3D circumstantially (mostly because people attracted to shiny objects want to see all their favorite movies in 3D): Christmas Carol, Transformers 3, Avengers, and Star Trek 2 II. None of them were any better with the 3D than without.

Don't spend the money on 3D unless the movie's composition DEMANDS it.

 

[Beliyal]

Just came back from watching it and I agree completely with what Bob said, especially about the 3D. A lot of scenes looked really just like a mish-mash of ... stuff and during the entire movie, I kept wondering how much better this will look in 2D when I get to watch it again on TV. Now I regret not going to the earlier screening when it was 2D, I wish I could have made it. I'll definitely try to avoid 3D at all costs from now on; it's in no way better or worth it, even when the movie is "for 3D".

Otherwise, I liked it, but Bob is completely right about the lack of padding and I join his wish for a director's cut, or something. Still, very enjoyable, especially since the moment Loki joins the action. He simply steals every scene he is in.

 

[idodo35]

holy cow i loved this movie, its not as good as the avengers and i did like captain america's theme better but as action and fun goes its easilly the second best in the siries (after avengers)
and the after credits scene? i was squeeing like a litlle girl, my non comic reading friends thought i had a sizure and i wouldnt shut up about it for like half an hour... seriously wow