Re: Thor

And now you can wash out that anti-Thor sentiment with some good old
fashioned fanboying (fangirling?).

Superheroes Wear Jeans & Don’t Leave Others Powerless : The Surprising
Restraint of *Thor
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2011/05/superheroes-wear-jeans-t-leave-others-powerless-the-surprising-restraint-of-thor

*
 Ryan Britt <http://www.tor.com/Ryan%20Britt> and Emily
Asher-Perrin<http://www.tor.com/Emily%20Asher-Perrin>

> *Ryan Britt*: Watching a summer blockbuster, much less a superhero film,
> usually makes me brace for the inevitable formula inherent in these kinds of
> movies. The action will be kinetic and a little too fast and confusing. Both
> the heroes and villains will be extremely adept at violence in ways that are
> at once familiar but somehow more over-the-top and “badass” than previous
> films of the same ilk.
>
> Fans often defend “bad” action movies by saying things like it's “just a
> popcorn movie!” or “what did you expect?” So the question becomes, how do
> you make a movie that satisfies fangirls and fanboys who love action and
> special effects while at the same time reeling in people like me who get a
> headache from gratuitous action? The answer: you do what *Thor* did. You
> hold back.
>
> Total *spoilers* for the movie below.
>
> To be sure, there is plenty of action in *Thor*, in fact the start of the
> film is loaded with it. Thor himself kills a beast/creature/thing by
> literally propelling his body through the monster and exploding himself out
> of its back. Pretty gross and fairly violent, this lets us know Thor doesn’t
> screw around. In a contemporary sense, having a superhero who just smacks
> the crap about of things with a hammer feels a little psychotic. Nothing
> civilized and elegant about pounding to get your way.
>
> But here’s where Branagh, Straczynski, Ashley Miller and everyone else
> involved with the story got it right. They take away Thor’s hammer and his
> powers, and then the real story gets going. In keeping with established
> continuity, Thor’s father Odin casts him out of Asgard because he’s too much
> of a jerk and needs to learn to grow up. This means Thor doesn’t have the
> power of Thor and despite being in good shape and sort of a stud, he’s
> basically mortal. Meaning, when he gets hit with Natalie Portman’s trailer,
> he actually falls down and passes out.
>
> *Superman II* played with this, as well, having Clark lose his powers
> midway through the movie. If someone is invincible and all-powerful, not
> only are we unconcerned with what happens to them, we also have a hard time
> getting to know them. When Clark Kent gets his ass kicked in the diner in
> *Superman II* only to then see General Zod is taking over the planet, the
> audience gets really worried. *Thor* doesn’t present as big of an
> Earth-threatening plot device, but with Thor himself similarly
> incapacitated, we get to know him a little better as a guy, rather than as a
> god.
>
> The ultimate fake-out in this movie comes about midway through when Thor
> goes to retrieve his hammer from the spot it’s landed. SHIELD has a whole
> compound set up around it now, trying to figure out why no one can pull a
> King Arthur on this thing. Thor cockily tells Natalie Portman that’s he’s
> going to waltz in there and then fly his way out. He does just that but
> then, when he gets to the hammer, the money shot of money shots, he can’t
> pull it up. The hammer won’t respond. And then Thor gets arrested. It was at
> this point that I really began to take heed; the tension was ratcheted up
> and I was even more excited to see him become Thor.
>
>  Chris Hemsworth is also pretty great in another surprising way; he plays
> the whole thing extremely straightforward. You totally buy that Portman and
> her buddy are swooning over this guy, and it’s not because he’s hot or
> faux-funny. Wisecracks in movies (not just superhero movies) have basically
> become the death of good dialogue in film. When everyone talks like Juno,
> it’s hard to keep the movie grounded in any kind of reliability. But
> conversely, if everyone is too dark and down in the dumps all the time, that
> too becomes one note. Personally, my main problem with Christian Bale’s
> Batman is his complete lack of humanity.
>
> Hemsworth’s Thor isn’t funny, and he isn’t dark, either. He’s genuine and
> charming. You get the sense that he really does feel guilty about putting
> his friends in danger and opening up his home, the realm of Asgard, to
> external danger. Even at the end, he clearly feels terrible about causing
> Loki to plunge to his doom. Thor is basically a nice guy, but he’s not self
> aware about it, and doesn’t make a big deal about it. His cockiness isn’t
> over-played, nor is his self-doubt. Everything seems well balanced. In
> short, he seems like a real person. Which is a pretty ridiculous assertion
> considering he does end up wielding a hammer and flying around in a silly
> silver suit.
>
> But I think this succeeds because the filmmakers decided to keep him in
> jeans and a t-shirt for a good portion of the movie. Because if Thor wears
> jeans and a t-shirt, then maybe any one of us could be as nice of a guy as
> Thor. Maybe we can be superheroes too.
>
>
>
> *Emily Asher-Perrin*: Should I start by saying that I was excited for this
> film to come out? Perhaps I should, though I should also point out that I
> had been informed by many that it “looked terrible” and I should lower my
> expectations. I did. As it turned out, I really didn’t need to at all.
>
> But I know what you’re really wondering about this movie, after seeing all
> those previews full of shouting and slow-motion cries of sorrow: can family
> drama, interpersonal relationships and old-fashioned romance drive a
> big-budget superhero flick?
>
> The answer is yes—in case you were in suspense about that.
>
> The advantage with *Thor* is different from other superhero yarns in that
> the plot of the original comic book series is pretty basic and not
> over-laden with aggravating period constraints and continuity problems that
> need extra attention. It has at its heart an undiluted, timeless plot that
> makes for great storytelling:
>
> It’s about a boy who gets exiled from home by his father so he can learn
> what he needs to become a good man.
>
> And that’s it. That’s all you really need.
>
> Everyone has their thresholds for believability and, more importantly,
> every audience member has moments when they want to be able to relate to a
> character and moments when they don’t care. In the case of Tony Stark, none
> of us may know what it’s like to be an uber-genius who can have anything we
> want just by asking our gorgeous red-headed assistant/girlfriend. Then
> again, we don’t really need to relate to Iron Man; we just need to love him
> for the jerk that he is.
>
> However, in the case of Thor, our hero is an impossibly gorgeous,
> impossibly strong, impossibly courageous near-god who receives awesome super
> powers by wielding a giant mallet.
>
> Maybe it’s time to inject a little humanity into the scenario.
>
> And humanity is what *Thor* has in spades. Odin’s disappointment in his
> son and the painful choice to banish him, Loki’s jealousy and need to be
> seen as his brother’s equal, Thor’s friends coming to his aid when he need
> them most, and his own romance with Jane Foster (portrayed by an awkwardly
> adorable Natalie Portman). Every hero needs his achilles; Thor’s happens to
> be a cute lady. And not in that stock superhero “the people I love are
> always in danger” kind of way. His love for her is naive but honest, epic
> yet somehow beautifully commonplace.
>
> Their relationship, though it may come rushing in on the plot awfully
> quick, happens to be one of the strongest points of the story for a very
> interesting reason; Jane is not left powerless by the end. Though Thor gets
> cut off from her, he never demands that she stay in her place like a good
> little woman and wait for him. So she starts searching the heavens because
> her love for him and her love for the mad work that she does are now
> irrevocably connected—almost as if it fate had already predetermined the
> whole thing. It results in a deeply satisfying ending that most superhero
> films are not lucky enough to have.
>
> Combine that with the chilling sneak peak scene at the end and *The
> Avengers *can’t come soon enough. This movie has upped the stakes in a big
> way for the arc Marvel has going—I’ll be biting my nails off to the quick
> until I get to see Thor in the same room as Nick Fury, Iron Man and the
> Hulk.
>


Johne Cook
| http://raygunrevival.com | http://authorculture.blogspot.com |*
*


On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Paul Christian Glenn <[email protected]>wrote:

> Whoa, really? Boy, I found Spider-Man 2 far and away the best of the
> series, and still my favorite superhero movie. Awesome villain, great
> internal conflict, and the fight on the train is the only onscreen battle
> that's ever made me feel like I was watching a comic book come to life. :)
>
>
>
> On May 12, 2011, at 8:09 AM, Johne Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > 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
>
> --
> 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