Re: Thor
Johne Cook <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.music.dadl.ot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Once again Ebert proves his mastery of blistering reviews. I really can't argue with anything he wrote. And yet, I had a high good time. I honestly wouldn't place it ahead of Superman, The Dark Knight, or Iron Man, but I certainly would place it ahead of Spider-Man 2, which I thought was ambitious but overlong and ultimately unremarkable. Thor was epic, cheesy fun, and I thought it did the best it could with what is, admittedly, a 2nd tier Marvel hero. (And I loved Loki in this. He was far more nuanced a character than I expected.) Johne Cook | http://raygunrevival.com | http://authorculture.blogspot.com |* * On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Peter T. Chattaway < petert-LOVM4QxV+tDq6eQxt3vRmLDks+cytr/[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 10 May 2011, Johne Cook wrote: > >> So where is Roger Ebert's review? >> > > Ask and ye shall receive. He's reviewed it at his blog, rather than in the > newspaper: > > http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/05/_i_didnt_attend_the.html > > > -- > dadl-ot mailing list > http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot > -- dadl-ot mailing list http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot