Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
...Disney's attempt to add humor to make a Guardians of the Galaxy?
Just noticed the music in the film is from Mark Mothersbaugh - originally a member of Devo but also responsible for the music on the cartoon Rug Rats.
It was a fun ride - made for kids with a few adult jokes and it was big dopey FUN. Deadpool for kids.
Better for adults that way.
More of a "Guardians of the Galaxy" zeitgeist than the other Marvel movies.
And, the use of Led Zep's "Immigrant Song" was a stroke of genius
Updated review below (posted to the Steve Hoffman boards several days ago & revised here):
My impression, Thor: Ragnarok is a mixed bag of tricks & treats, ...too good to pick apart based on the fun-ride, acting and clever dialogue, but not quite satisfying enough for the content to stand out as a top tier Marvel Studios film. Although I may be in the minority here, I liked the prior Thor franchise films a wee bit better than this one overall, strengths notwithstanding.
I found the best moments/acting to be the conversations between characters, which may be an indication of how jaded I've become to FX heavy superhero/supervillain battles. The clever dialogue between Mark Rufulo's Banner character and Chris Hemsworth's Thor was interesting because it superseded the slapstick elements of the Hulk/Thor interactions. Unfortunately, there were moments where the film reached back into Marvel's well established bag-o-tricks for cheap comic relief via FX (ergo Hulk smashing Thor like a rag doll in the same manner he did to Loki in the first Avengers film). Again, not picking the film apart, just pointing out how repeating a recognizable visual effect has a diminishing return. IMO, going back to the well rarely fills the bucket as full the second time around.
Personal biases notwithstanding, highlights of the film are still fair game for criticism. While amusing, Thor behaving out of character ...using snarky lingo more apropos to Tony Stark... is a bit disappointing. Also, Thor's anguish over losing his long locks ...part of his Viking heritage... seems more about updating his traditional character through a moment of forced comic relief than something to move the plot forward. Note: I'm not opposed to poking fun at superheroes, but a little goes a long way. It should be used sparingly, never losing sight of the overarching theme of the franchise and established motivations of the characters. One should be careful poking fun, you can lose an eye that way.
In my estimation, Thor: Ragnarok veered perilously close to camp. Jeff Goldblum's acting delivered, but his character was just too laid back and obnoxiously transparent to convincingly sell his cruelty as being utterly malevolent, morally bankrupt, callous and creepy. In fact, there may be a subtext to his character's showman-like ruthlessness, but in order to draw the obvious conclusion they'd have to recast Alec Baldwin in the role of Ragnarok.
In spite of these caveats, this is an enjoyable, fast paced film ...far from my favorite storyline in the Marvel universe..., but fun nonetheless. Tom Hiddleston's ambiguous trickster Loki is spot on, which keeps the film from going too far astray, and the FX visuals, scripting and music choices are all first rate. If grading this in comparison with other well crafted Marvel Universe films, I'd probably give it three to three and a half bags of popcorn on a five bag scale. IOW, if you like Marvel's other entries in this series, you'll probably enjoy this'n every bit as much.
distracted by it (not more involved) during the fight scenes it was in.
I preferred Guardians of the Galaxy, this was sloppy in comparison.
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: