Midnight Screening: "Thor"

Brad and Jerrid discuss "Thor" after leaving the midnight screening.

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments

  • 5/6/2011 3:20 AM Zach LaVoy wrote:
    I have to agree with Brad on this one. Thor was great because Hemsworth really owned the role. Kat Dennings was pretty useless and the 3-D was nice for static shots of Asgard, but generally weak during the fighting scenes.
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 3:27 AM mwong wrote:
    Good thing I saw it in 2D, thats the thing with watching a movie in Australia. There's a lack of balance between 2D and 3D choices, so people have to go to very extreme locations just to see a movie. And yea, Brad pretty much said what I would have said about the movie. Although, Captain America might blow it out of the water.
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 3:55 AM tiggerpete wrote:
    I loved it, I thought it was a lot of fun, and very well written, though the cinematography was a little too shaky for my tastes
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 4:05 AM Mr. Saturn wrote:
    I'll be seeing this sometime soon with my dad and I'm glad to hear that impressions have been generally good.

    Sounds like they did what they needed to. Got a good guy to play the super hero who makes the film work.
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 4:34 AM Paul S. wrote:
    Yeah I definitely agree with Brad although I think I liked it a bit more than that. I really thought even beyond all it's fun, it was just a beautiful work of a movie with lots of artistry, love and care behind it. Hemsworth was just pure awesome, the chemistry between he and Portman was indeed really nice, and I thought it had possibly the most all-out high energy and wit in a comic book film since Spider-man 2 or the the Donner Superman installments. I really do think it's the best of the Marvel films to date. Definitely re-watch the film in 2D, Brad.
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 7:04 AM Drew wrote:
    Did Jerrid make a pokemon the first movie reference with the "Minnesota vikings" bit? O_o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kni0YN76Ux0
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 8:38 AM Timo wrote:
    I wish I could so see this in 2D, but unfortunately no theater in my town is showing that version. I'll be going to watch it this weekend. The one thing that bugs me from the trailer thus far is that Valhalla doesn't evoke a Norse ambiance in the slightest, but looks downright futuristic in its design.
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 10:14 AM Bob wrote:
    so many continuity, mcguffin, plot device fuck ups in the first hour and five minutes that its embarassing
    Reply to this
    1. 5/6/2011 3:17 PM Riccardo Zenobio wrote:
      Seriously, this movie has more gaping, dilated holes than you could shake a dog bone at. Why's this movie trying to entertain me when all I can focus on is Jane's inexplicable infatuation with our hero, not to mention said hero's night/day personality adjustment or Heimdall's bipolar disorder. Let's not even get into Asgard's supposed role in governing these "nine realms"...AHHH... my head. Damn this movie with all it's hopeless to follow continuity and inconvenient plot holes.

      I came home from the theater with my love last night and we were both furious at the wasted evening. Her vagina was fuming, I mean pot-kettle steaming; so loud I could hear it from the bathroom. At the time, I rushed to the kitchen to offer condolences to the wounded beaver only to be rebuffed and directed to the kettle boiling upon the stove-top. I played along, laughing it off, but looking in her eyes I knew, her luscious lips were in mourning.

      I'm so ashamed for trying to have enjoyed this film but with all it's incredible leaps of logic which, mind you, are unlike any other in the superhero film genre, I'm simply left embarrassed. Almost as embarrassed as I'd be if I linked my name here to a beastiality website, not that I'd be stupid enough to do that.

      Ugh, I was so put off by Thor. Go see it with your girlfriend if for no other reason than to make her vagina squeal.
      Reply to this
      1. 5/6/2011 3:32 PM Bruce wrote:
        If a movie about an immortal Norse God with a magic hammer doesn't make any sense, then I have absolutely no faith in this world. Seriously; take a chill pill. This isn't "The Godfather."
        Reply to this
      2. 5/6/2011 3:43 PM Nitpicker Nick wrote:
        And what's with the fact that he could fly with his hammer?? Hammers don't make humans fly! That is scientifically impossible! And why was he angry at the beginning of the movie, but then heroic and likable at the end?? It's almost like it was some kind of character development or something! Bah.
        Reply to this
        1. 5/7/2011 4:56 PM angelique_sp wrote:
          Hah, love it! Thank Godzilla for Nitpicker Nick....Marry me!?
          Reply to this
    2. 5/11/2011 5:10 PM glenn wrote:
      They should have made it more realistic.
      Norse Gods shouldn't have powers.
      They should have ultra realistic cars with millions of gadgets or realistically dodge bullets by running quite fast.
      Coz this movie Sucks.
      Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 10:29 AM mixmastermind wrote:
    I gotta disagree with Jerrid, Thor is an insanely silly comic.
    Reply to this
    1. 5/8/2011 6:44 AM AP wrote:
      Yeah, I'm not sure where he got the "the comic wasn't campy" bit from either. At one point in the comic, Thor gets replaced a by a horse-faced alien, that's how silly it can get.

      Anyway, the movie was one of the better Marvel films, IMO.
      Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 11:22 AM BlaydeTan wrote:
    I'd have to agree with Jerrid overall. While they definitely had good casting for the most part (agreeing with Brad on getting rid of the one-liner character), they changed the background and motivation behind some of the characters that completely skews it from source material. I'm not going to go into the exact details because that would be introducing spoilers, but I found the deviation to cause me to enjoy this film less.

    Visually I was impressed. The concept of the Bifrost's appearance was good. The way they melded the science and magic aspects together I felt worked reasonably well, though the origin of Mjolnir somewhat tweaked my nerves a little.

    If I were to ignore both the mythos and comic histories behind the movie I would find it an appealing experience, but since it's supposed to be a screen presentation of existing material I can't really jump in behind it.
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 11:23 AM M.H. Smith wrote:
    After watching this, I now want to see this movie! I mean i wanted to see it just to drool over Kat Dennings anyway, but you guys made it sound like a good flick besides here! {I'm sorry, but I'm gonna love KD even if her part sucks!}
    Great review Brad & Jerrid!
    ~_M.H._~
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 11:28 AM Curt wrote:
    Totally disagree with Jerrid. But what can we expect from someone who likes "Reba"?
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 1:38 PM LucasChad wrote:
    Going to see it tonight and I know I'm going to be yelled at by Brad, but I'm seeing it in 3D and I always enjoyed it because I LOVE seeing stuff come out of the screen!

    I have an idea Brad! You can see it again in 2D with Brian and Alex then post a longer review debating how good or bad it is.

    Finally I want to point out that Marvel movies balanced well between action and character-driven drama. I'm sure this movie has the right balance since its directed by Kenneth Branagh known for his Shakespearean films.
    Reply to this
    1. 5/6/2011 9:46 PM LucasChad wrote:
      UPDATE: Enjoyed a lot despite its small negatives. The 3D was eye popping and I love all the action scenes. I'm sure Captain America will be better though!
      Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 5:28 PM david fullam wrote:
    Saw the 3D version this afternoon. In short IT F#CKING RULED! Cap and The Avengers are in serious trouble quality wise. This one will be hard to beat. The bald headed reviewer lacks sight as well as hair.
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 7:37 PM jerrid wrote:
    Ok. I want to say it again. I do NOT like Reba! I refer you to my comment on "Brad & Jerrid are Annnoying" as I don't want to fully repeat myself.
    Reply to this
    1. 5/6/2011 10:38 PM Francis wrote:
      Sure Jerrid. I bet you have old magazines of Reba on your desk.
      Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 8:25 PM mieville wrote:
    Feel like i'm out in the cold here but I really liked Kat Dennings in this. Enjoyed the film a lot, sure it didn't really have a proper character arc but it's a daft superhero movie they shouldn't be 27 hours long.
    Reply to this
  • 5/6/2011 9:46 PM Boag wrote:
    Yeah Thor has always been serious in comic books.

    http://withtvcamehappiness.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/creamsicle.jpg
    Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 12:14 AM Lyle Huckins wrote:
    I liked it I thought it was pretty good. I thought the guy who played Loki did a good job, you could actually see how Thor and the other gods could be taken in by him the way he played it. That last weird Laugh he gave during the final fight with Thor kind of though, I'm surprised Branna didn't have it edited out. Any thoughts
    Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 12:52 AM Fiery Little One wrote:
    I saw this movie earlier. My only knock would be the 3d. It was superfluous, but unlike some other movies where they've added 3d after the fact, at least it was there. Like Brad, I'm not overly familiar with the comics, but I really got into this one. I would agree with you, Brad, on everything except Kat Denning's character, Darcy. I thought she was hilarious. Was her character necessary? Probably not, but I think she represented how most average people would act if they were in that situation. Strange guy = taser, Stuff stolen = worry about what's in important to you, etc, etc.
    Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 12:52 AM Masamune wrote:
    i dont really care about thor and seeing how jared thinks its cheezy i probably wont like it. i dont like cheezy hero movies if i want to laugh ill watch a comedy! jared was right about dark knight, if marvel didnt sell their rights to Disney i think their movies would probably turn out a lot better than they are.

    oh and as far as 3-D glasses and movies go apparently some guy devoloped a new pair of glasses for those type of movies that you can buy off his website.


    http://www.2d-glasses.com/


    as the link implies these glasses turn 3-D movies into 2-D movies. hahahahaha you could just go to the non 3-D screening but i thought you all should know anyway.

    BTW

    FOUR TIMES THE STEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAK!
    Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 1:00 AM SMC wrote:
    You mention movie looking like bootleg, I agree 100%. 3D made movie darker and to me ruined colors. Want to see this in 2d someday in future. Overall good movie ruined by little things.
    Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 3:20 AM EspanolBot wrote:
    Yeah, the movie is a lot better in 2D than 3D, just to let you know.

    Have to agree with a lot about what you said, it is a little cheesy, though that could probably be due to them, more of less, directly adapting the old Jack Kirby comics from the 60s or so, only with less fake-Shakespearean dialogue.

    Idris Elba was cool though, as was the guy playing Loki. Actually the guy playing Loki did a REALLY good job, I thought.
    Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 3:22 AM zeek wrote:
    Jerrid is absolutely out of touch with the comics. It's all about the over the top fun camp. Volstagg for president 2012
    Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 4:22 AM Plause wrote:
    I liked it, though it's probably due to my expecting that it would be stupid based on the trailer.
    Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 6:49 AM Cthulhu07 wrote:
    Brad, don't know if you read this, but I would love hear your opinion of The Asylum's Almighty Thor...
    Reply to this
    1. 5/7/2011 4:53 PM angelique_sp wrote:
      OOOooo...now that's a GREAT idea! 2 sides of the coin, twice the Brad
      Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 4:29 PM DrunkenPunk800 wrote:
    God, I wish people would quit referencing Silence of the Lambs every time Hopkins is in something. As far as I'm concerned, Brian Cox is the real Lektor, not Hopkins.

    I like Hopkins, but always thought his performance in Silence really sucked. He was way too over the top.

    I want to watch Hopkins it will be movies like Magic, The Edge, Freejack, and the Rite.
    Reply to this
  • 5/7/2011 6:06 PM Pisthetairos wrote:
    Yeah, I gotta agree Kat Denning's character was pretty annoying, but then again, I didn't like Natalie Portman's character either. On the other hand, the movie was pretty well-handed, I liked it a lot. I'm a huge fan of early Kirby/Stan Lee stuff, so I was glad they kept it.
    Reply to this
  • 5/8/2011 12:48 AM Allen Moreax wrote:
    So, will you review the latest SyFy channel film "Almighty Thor"? I'd like to know which is better.
    Reply to this
  • 5/8/2011 1:00 AM Tam Lin wrote:
    I'm with Brad, I thought this was an awesome movie. It was funny, it was cool, it was surprisingly well-acted, it had a genuinely engrossing family drama featuring very talented actors, paired with awesome high-fantasy action and quirky tongue-in-cheek humor. Tom Hiddleston is a revelation. I couldn't be more surprised by how great of a time I had.
    Reply to this
  • 5/8/2011 3:17 AM GTPodcast wrote:
    I also own a set of 2D Glasses, and having tested them out at a 3D showing of Thor, I can attest that they work great.

    And no, I don't work for them.
    Reply to this
  • 5/8/2011 12:49 PM Ben wrote:
    I held off on watching your review, Brad, till after I'd seen the movie as with new releases, I tend to disagree, but I'm always interested in what you had to say about the movie. This time I was surprised that I totally agreed with you, in that the movie was enjoyable, the 3D was rubbish (shoulda seen it in 2D) and some of the side characters were unnecessary to the plot of the film. I just saw it today and though I believe the projector was functioning fine in our cinema, there were some scenes where you literally could not tell what was going on. I blame this on a combination of the darkness and the shakey cam that they like to do these days.
    Reply to this
  • 5/8/2011 3:53 PM Doperwtje wrote:
    The 3d-version was way too dark with me too, maybe it's to do with the way they converted it nut I could barely see most of the frostgiant-fights in the film because of it. Still liked it though, Only thing that kinda irked me was Loki whom I never really got during most of the time. Still had a good time though.
    Reply to this
  • 5/9/2011 3:55 AM The Movie Explorer wrote:
    You said what other friends of mine said about this movie...i.e.: see it, but don’t bother with the 3D.

    Your comparison to Flash Gordon is good enough a recommendation for me. I love that movie. Though I consider it interesting for everything BUT Flash Gordon himself.

    Stop me before this post becomes a non-stop FG gush-fest!
    Reply to this
  • 5/9/2011 11:00 PM Max wrote:
    Eh, I'm kind of in the middle on this one. All the actors/actresses were fine except for Kat Dennings, but that's more from the writing than anything. It was funny at parts, and I really liked the Asgard scenes.

    However, there were two things that really in my opinion made this movie rank fairly low on the Marvel Movie Scale (Above Iron Man 2, below Iron Man, probably below The Incredible Hulk): Pacing and the action scenes. Honestly, the Pacing of this movie was terrible.

    It started out really slow, taking I think a good half hour or more on Thor's fall to earth, and still meandering about afterwards until the halfway point when it goes into overdrive. For example, for all the "chemistry" between Jane Foster and Thor, we have....maybe 2 scenes of them really together. Then it all just suddenly ends in a fairly messy way that I don't think even a camp explanation could forgive.

    As well, the fight scenes were not very well pulled off. Either the scene was too shaky to really get a sense of what was happening, or it was too stilted and awkward. In my humble opinion, this is probably one of the worse I've seen in terms of action. Explosions are nice, but....I don't know, it just did not feel very exciting, and they never really pulled me in. So, overall, its a mediocre but enjoyable summer blockbuster, with enough flash and comedy to make it somewhat enjoyable.
    Reply to this
  • 5/10/2011 12:51 AM Anonymous wrote:
    Would love to know your opinion on Almighty Thor by the Asylum
    Reply to this
  • 5/10/2011 12:59 AM BooRat wrote:
    I really want to see this movie I can't wait to get to the theater! From what I've read in inter views and reviews Hawkeye appears in this! I trust you reviews guys! but I know this was going to have a leavel of cheese to it as Thor talks in Shakespearian English and that's hard to take seriously!!!
    Reply to this
  • 5/13/2011 5:19 PM ares2101 wrote:
    I took a date to the 3D screening of this yesterday, we both thought it was awesome! This is a movie I'd want on DVD when it comes out.
    Reply to this
  • 6/2/2011 9:53 AM Livia wrote:
    Haha. I woke up down today. You’ve cerheed me up!
    Reply to this
  • 6/3/2011 6:33 AM uihnmmrhln wrote:
    N8HMir awihiiopczny
    Reply to this
  • 6/3/2011 12:40 PM uzkaureuu wrote:
    cIXcUQ , [url=http://lizfpanigptn.com/]lizfpanigptn[/url], [link=http://lebvxievejvn.com/]lebvxievejvn[/link], http://pqlvpdrqcwob.com/
    Reply to this
  • 6/5/2011 10:06 AM atfcydvha wrote:
    1zokpK nwvndrngbvuk
    Reply to this
  • 6/6/2011 7:44 AM mpjnxvvyi wrote:
    ulPUOZ , [url=http://neretzhpmcoj.com/]neretzhpmcoj[/url], [link=http://coazfxutostm.com/]coazfxutostm[/link], http://ayynrtzlzaoy.com/
    Reply to this
  • 6/14/2011 11:51 AM nnsadjwewey wrote:
    xnoe lr ujzrw
    Reply to this
  • 6/14/2011 11:52 AM nnsadjwewey wrote:
    qbt vb lyvor
    Reply to this
Leave a comment

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.