As i am to mine.
I liked the movie.
I loved Iron Man Three, and thought this one was better.
I felt the realisation that Asgard had aircraft and ranged weapons and defensive turrets made them seem more like advanced aliens than gods. And that's a good thing.
In my opinion.
As i am to mine.
I liked the movie.
I loved Iron Man Three, and thought this one was better.
I felt the realisation that Asgard had aircraft and ranged weapons and defensive turrets made them seem more like advanced aliens than gods. And that's a good thing.
In my opinion.
As i am to mine.
I liked the movie.
I loved Iron Man Three, and thought this one was better.
I felt the realisation that Asgard had aircraft and ranged weapons and defensive turrets made them seem more like advanced aliens than gods. And that's a good thing.
In my opinion.
I agree with you on some aspects of the film. The Asgard attack was the best part, but I think Marvel has to do something to make their villains viable in the film and not just in the trailers. Loki can't steel the show in every film. Loki saved the film.
I don't understand how this movie got such good reviews. This is the 2nd Marvel movie in a row that has screwed up its villain. Iron Man 3 *******IZED the Mandarin, and Malekith was bland as hell. The action was good. Particularly when the elves attacked Asgard. Had a Star Wars feel to it. The story was so bad IMHO. They did not even let Malekith come off as a threat. Even Thor's mother kicked his ***. In the last 3 Marvel films, The Avengers Included, the villain was no threat. It was their plot against the world. They need to produce a villain that is physically as well as mentally viable to these characters, and these villains need more of a presence in these films.
Perhaps Ultron and Thanos will live up to your expectations.... Which is why Thor and his Avengers will have to become a team again. 2015 is coming....
If they made him all powerful then the dramatic storytelling elements would go right out the window. Thor would then just be a web series of him smacking threats down then flying off like Cheadle's Captain Planet.
I agree that if he were displaying comic book levels of power, then the movie would've ended like...the moment the elves attacked Asgard. HOWEVER, I think they should've made just a wee bit more effort in balancing out his powers where he won't come off looking like a little b!7c#.
I mean he single handedly took on an army of frost giants, the only one in the avengers that is capable of subduing the hulk...he's the effin god of thunder!
If 3 asgardians that are nowhere near the power levels of Thor can take down a kursified elf, it's complete BS that he jobbed to kurse. And to make matters worse,
his friggin mom died in front of his eyes! That alone should've put Thor on hulk levels of pissed offness!
To me it just seemed like they were rushing to move the plot forward and the whole point of that sequence was to have
loki "die".
Dont get me wrong, kurse IS powerful, but he shouldn't punk Thor the way he did in the movie. IMO though, what would've made that sequence better for me would be to have TWO super dark elves. One should give thor a little trouble, but two is a handful.
And another eff up with kurse's powers is that it made malekith seem so....underwhelming. It'd be like one of banes henchman providing more of a challenge to batman than bane himself. Or captain America having trouble taking out red skulls 2nd in command.
One action sequence that made sense was the battle of smallville in MoS. Clark had to duke it out with TWO kryptonians. They were warriors with years of battle experience, however supermans cells had been drinking in the suns radiation for years, thus making him more powerful than both, which is why he was able to power through that fight despite his inexperience. In the end he didn't get punked like Thor, which is why I was extremely satisfied with the fights in MoS...it was all consistent.
I went off on a rant. It just really bothered me, so forgive me fellas. I didn't hate the movie. I liked it...but because of a few things, it kept it from reaching legendary status.
IMO though, what would've made that sequence better for me would be to have TWO super dark elves. One should give thor a little trouble, but two is a handful.
I preferred Thor 2.
If only because i don't enjoy the "Alien arriving on Earth only to be confused by the way we do things" like we saw on Thor(Don't get me wrong. I loved the original, and feel the sequel improved on it in every way to feel like the story is going somewhere).
I just prefer a fantastical storyline going to other worlds and locations, so i can be wowed by the set pieces and effects.
I love seeing things i haven't seen before and despite the settings in Thor 2 being decidedly LOTR-ish, it was different enough for me to enjoy it.
I think both IM3 and Thor 2 are great movies, because they deal with stories that define the characters.
Tony Stark's story isn't about the Mandarin, its about him facing his inner demons, his Chitauri invasion induces PTSD, and the Mandarin is just a background plot device that enables Tony to accept his fate.
Same with Thor2: Its not about Malekith, the Kurse or their grand design: its about Thor, Odin and Loki, as ultimately every Asgardian story should be. The story of Thor is set up as a trilogy
with Thor learning humility in Thor, and Loki learning that he cannot be king legally. Then in Thor 2, Thor learns to forgive his brother , not knowing that he has been betrayed - with Loki achieving his goal -(again, Malekith's ambition is just business as usual for Asgardians) and grabbing the crown. Thor 2 is Empire strikes back in that evil wins. The resolution of the Asgardian family story will follow in Thor 3 with Loki defeated - probably redeemed in the end - and Thor accepting his own responsibility as king.
I think both IM3 and Thor 2 are great movies, because they deal with stories that define the characters.
Tony Stark's story isn't about the Mandarin, its about him facing his inner demons, his Chitauri invasion induces PTSD, and the Mandarin is just a background plot device that enables Tony to accept his fate.
Same with Thor2: Its not about Malekith, the Kurse or their grand design: its about Thor, Odin and Loki, as ultimately every Asgardian story should be. The story of Thor is set up as a trilogy
with Thor learning humility in Thor, and Loki learning that he cannot be king legally. Then in Thor 2, Thor learns to forgive his brother , not knowing that he has been betrayed - with Loki achieving his goal -(again, Malekith's ambition is just business as usual for Asgardians) and grabbing the crown. Thor 2 is Empire strikes back in that evil wins. The resolution of the Asgardian family story will follow in Thor 3 with Loki defeated - probably redeemed in the end - and Thor accepting his own responsibility as king.
And another eff up with kurse's powers is that it made malekith seem so....underwhelming. It'd be like one of banes henchman providing more of a challenge to batman than bane himself.
I don't see whats so hard to understand, you said it yourself, except you have your argument screwed up. Kurse was to Bane ,as Malekith was to Talia. Bane was the henchman enforcer, just like Kurse was, if you got it in TDKR, it should have been easy here.
I don't see whats so hard to understand, you said it yourself, except you have your argument screwed up. Kurse was to Bane ,as Malekith was to Talia. Bane was the henchman enforcer, just like Kurse was, if you got it in TDKR, it should have been easy here.
I didn't get anything screwed up here, as bane was working with talia, whereas kurse was malekiths henchman.
I don't wanna tell you how to post, but heads up, your reply/style is a start off point to arguments. Don't see why you have to imply I was stupid and didn't get the movie.