Thor: Movie Review - Reel Advice Movie Reviews

Sunday, May 1, 2011

Thor: Movie Review

"Thor" is finally here and we are getting nearer and nearer into one of the biggest superhero tie-ups ever seen on the big screen with 2012's "The Avengers". "Thor", in our honest opinion, has the biggest chance to fail as a film out of all the superheroes in the Avengers quadruplet (Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Captain America are the other heroes). There's just something about the subject material that makes us feel that it is bound to be a rotten apple. And historically speaking, superhero movies are not surefire winners. For example, 2003's "Hulk" needed an instant reboot in 2008. The third piece of "The Avengers" puzzle is finally here - did it do good or not? As usual, read on to find out our verdict.

More than a millenia ago, Odin (Anthony Hopkins), king of Asgard, waged war against the Frost Giants of Jotunheim to prevent them from conquering the Nine Realms. The Asgardians defeat the Frost Giants and seizes their power source, the Casket of Ancient Winters. Today, Odin's son Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is to be named the new king but the ceremony is interrupted when the Frost Giants attempt to retrieve the Casket. Thor wants to declare war against the Frost Giants but Odin disagrees. Against his father's orders, Thor goes to Jotunheim accompanied by his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) to confront the Laufey, the leader of the Frost Giants. A battle ensues which forces Odin to intervene and save their lives. The battle destroys the truce between the two races. Odin decides to strip Thor of his powers and exiles him to Earth. His hammer Mjolnir, the source of his power, also falls to Earth but is now protected by a spell and only allows a worthy being to wield it.

"Thor" proved us wrong at all angles. The film was epic in terms of story and presentation even rivaling the best superhero films the past few years. Although it did not score a perfect score in our books, "Thor" still proves it worth by the time the credits start rolling. What we liked about "Thor" is its story. The downfall of Thor as god and becoming a human was just brilliantly conceptualized and more so developed on-screen. This is one-time that we have to agree that the film version is somewhat better than the actual source material. At times, the film even becomes emotional due to Thor's humanity (it is also a good vehicle for some comedic moments). What prevents the movie from being perfect is the love story between Thor and Jane Foster. It just felt rushed and raw because it seems that Jane Foster suddenly falls in love at Thor. We also felt the action sequences needed more character. "Thor" is a film that will make you laugh, will make you think and can even make you shed a tear.

Rating: 4 and a half reels





Why you should watch it:
- the story was really great, we really liked the idea of Thor's downfall as god
- the film was a balanced mix of drama, seriousness and comedy

Why you shouldn't watch it:
- some may find the story development raw (especially the love between Thor and Jane Foster)
- we felt that the action sequences needed more oomph


7 comments:

  1. nice post, the movie was good :) though sorry if you can still edit, but its more than a millenium ago wasn't it? :) 965 AD - Joe

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Joe.

    Thanks for the head's up! We got confused with our computation there! :D

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi,
    In the Marvel comic books, Thor was really exiled to Earth. So they didn't stray away from the actual source. =)
    Nice review!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yup! Thor was exiled to Earth but he was transferred to another man's body. Are we correct?

    Anyway, thanks for the compliment! :D

    ReplyDelete
  5. Technically, no. Thor was exiled as a Blake Construct (a form looking just like Blake, possessing his memories, but in reality, Thor - which is also why the form got less frail - or so the story goes).

    Blake was suspended in time in the cave when he found the cane. During the High Evolutionary/New Gods arc, Blake was un-suspended.

    At least, that's Odin's story that makes the most sense from later events. Kinda confusing, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Interesting review. Now, if you had actually read any of the first "Thor" stories (which were originally published in early "Journey Into Mystery" comics FEATURING the Mighty Thor, you would know that Thor's human experience is not an original idea in translation to the big screen. Let's check our homework a tad, please!
    Believe me, the MAIN reason a lot of super hero tales fall flat is that, if anything, they deviate far too much from the original concepts. Call me a blasphemer, but the movie "Superman", starring the late Christopher Reeves was (at least to a die-hard Superman fan like me) a complete and utter travesty and insult to the creators of Superman and his fans.
    Gratefully, although I have yet to see "Thor", the trailors seem to indicate that the original story lines are right on target. Mjolnir, Thor's hammer, looks exactly like in the comics! Kudos for visual accuracies! And Chris Hemsworth is stunning as the God of Thunder. I am really revved up to see one of my favorites in action on the big screen!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Tom Hiddleston's Loki STOLE THE SHOW in my opinion. He played what could have been a cheesy, ridiculous character with heart, realism, and such believability. I found myself wishing the Earth scenes would finish so I could see more of what Loki was up to! What a refreshing change, to see a villain (although IMO he was more of an anti-hero) with a real motivation and REASONS for his actions. I hope he wins some serious awards for this role because he seriously deserves it.

    ReplyDelete

Post Top Ad

Pages