Thundergod

The first X-Men movie made $296 million (foreign and domestic) over it's entire theatrical run.

Thor just made that much in less than two weeks.

I think it's gonna do ok.

I enjoyed it. My friend that was with me is a Thor fanatic and completely picked it apart which was a tad annoying, but a good movie overall IMO.

I liked this movie. I have no knowledge of the Thor comics, other than knowing that there are Thor comics. I do have a passing understanding of Norse mythology from a couple classes I took years ago, but I suspect Marvel was pretty liberal with their take on things from the get go, so I didn't expect this movie to be super accurate.

That said I really enjoyed it. I felt some of the character stuff, Loki's motivations, Thor's transformation, were a little too subtle, and some of that could have been made a little more convincing... That said, none of it was so out of the blue or un-explainable as to jar me or make me roll my eyes.

Special effects were good, I loved seeing Thor in action, seemed very powerful. Even some good eye candy with Kat Denning and Portman around, the girl who played sif was pretty cute too.

All in all, fun movie. Though I was wondering, did they actually reference the guy with the Bow as Hawkeye? There was some noise near me during that part, I didn't hear if they actually mentioned his name.

Loving the increased involvement from SHIELD in these movies, loved the teaser at the end. I was surprised that in the showing I went to, at least 80% of the audience left the moment the credits started, even my GF was like "What, have these people never seen a Marvel Movie?"

I'm curious though, I could kind of gauge from the other Super Hero movies, how accurate or not they are to the comic since I've read the comics, but I've never picked up an Issue of thor. Was this one at all accurate to the books?

(I haven't read this whole thread so sorry if that question has been answered.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Father Xmas and also Super 8 (which seems like an ET remake except ET is POed).

I laughed when I read this, for weeks since this trailer has been showing up more often I've been saying... "So Spielberg remade ET for adults..."

I liked the movie. I thought Hemsworth made a great Thor, and the cuts back and forth between Midgard and Asgard were handled fairly well. It would have been very easy for the movie to become muddled in trying to portray the story in 2 vastly separate locations, but it managed pretty well IMHO.

My wife, who is not a comic book fan and has never read an issue of Thor in her life, also thought it was good. I asked her if she had any trouble following the story, and she said no, it was all perfectly clear to her. Heh, for a change SHE is the one who wants to go see it again on the big screen.

What GL doesn't have going for it, like Thor, is a chunk of the movie in CGI land with lots of CGI critters. If the weak part for Thor was Asgard, not sure how the Oa scenes will be received by the critics.

As for Ryan Reynolds, I think the Hollywood group think was;

A) Test pilots are cocky bastards.

B) Think of an actor who plays cocky bastards that looks like he can fit in a fighter jet and still looks good in spandex (which thankfully eliminated Seth Rogen).

C) Won't cost a lot if the movie does well enough for sequels.

19 Thor Wallpapers

Well I heard that while Asgards walking down the street looked campy and the Midgard story was essentially a "fish out of water" story, the other worldness of Asgard and Jotunheim was too different (and too dark in the case of Jotunheim, too CGI shiny for Asgard) for the casual comic fan.

Of course for those who enjoy Baysplosion action films enjoyed all the SMASH fighting scenes, it was great (which still explains why those same people still think X-Men 3 was the best movie of the trilogy).