So, starting in 3, 2, 1...
PART ONE: THE PLOT
Two years after the events of Thor, the hammer wielding god of thunder is busy quelling rebellions and crushing the foes of Asgard, bringing peace to the Nine Realms.
That peace is threatened, however, when an old foe, Malekith, and his Dark Elves from an age long past return from darkness to challenge Asgard again.
Worse, Thor's Earthling damsel Jane Foster is caught at the center of the struggle, having stumbled upon the powerful Aether which Malekith seeks, an element that will allow him to return the universe to darkness.
Forced to rely on his deceptive brother and rival, Loki, Thor must destroy the Aether and stop Malekith before all Nine Realms are cast into eternal blackness.
PART TWO: THE REVIEW
I enjoyed the sequel to Marvel's Thor, but it could have been so much more.
First of all, it could have done with quite a few less jokes, particularly in the climax, when it could have been and should have been far more epic.
Despite being visually entertaining, the movie needed and deserved more development. The villain, Malekith, failed to deliver as the ancient enemy he was described as, and was poorly developed.
More frustrating, to me, was the lack of inner struggle in Thor himself. While the original movie had Thor facing an inner flaw, his pride, to overcome a problem, the sequel included no such inner struggle, unless you count a damsel in distress and an insane brother as an inner struggle. And if neither the hero or the villain has a flaw, the story will hurt for it.
As an aspiring author, I know what goes behind the creation of writing a story, and the first thing I look for is the protagonist's inner struggle. There wasn't one.
Jane Foster, the lead female role in the movie, was much more of a distressing damsel than a brave character, although her vast intelligence as a scientist and her effectiveness in the climax was still intact.
Be that as it may, the movie was fun, and while many funny moments didn't belong, they were still funny. I was disappointed with a few of the actors/actress's performances, mainly Natalie Portman, but others were better, foremost of which being the performance of Tom Hiddleston as Loki.
Almost completely stealing away the screen, Tom Hiddleston's Loki, the untrustworthy and vengeful adopted son of Odin, kept the screen time interesting with the dynamic he added between himself and Thor. You know he'll do anything to get to the top, and yet you can't help but want to see him redeem himself. Although, if you're a reader of Norse Mythology like me, you'll know where his story ultimately ends.
Secondly, I thought there would be some jealousy going on between the Asgardian female warrior Sif and Jane surrounding their affection for Thor, who shows respect towards one and little strong emotion towards the other.
Now back to the positives: The action was very cool.
I particularly enjoyed watching the Dark Elf ships in action, using their angular, rigid bodies to maneuver around and dodge laser bolts. The landscapes and visuals were impressive, and there was also a good bit more of Asgard shown than in the original movie, which only showed the city itself.As before stated, Tom Hiddleston's performance and the dynamic between he and Thor was entertaining, and the humor was great, although I would have liked less in the climax.
As a movie based off a Marvel comic book, it's amazing. As an epic one....It could have used a little more oomph.
PART THREE: CONTENT REPORT
Predictably, there is a good bit of kissing and flirting. A man is shown in a news report running around nude, although objectionable areas are blurred out (Else the movie would be rated R!).
Violence includes knife fighting, people being killed and massive areas being obliterated throughout, although there is very little blood shown. One character's hand is shown cut off.
The Dark Elves have an elite unit called the Kursed, who use some kind of object to, I guess, burn themselves into agony and rage, which they spill out on their enemies. The Dark Elves, Malekith and the Kursed could be scary for younger children, along with a few scene including the Aether, which might also be disturbing for children.
Loki, being who he is, deceives and has his own sneaky agendas. One scene shows him in the midst of a prison cell that he wrecked, sitting with his hair down, looking slightly crazy.
Characters are shown reveling and feasting with drinking involved, and Sif asks Thor to have a drink with her.
The movie is rated PG-13 for sequences of intense sci-fi action and violence; some suggestive content.
PART FOUR: RATING AND CONCLUSION
I give it four stars. Although I was disappointed with several things as I said above, the movie was fun, funny, and had a few cool action moments, paired with the highly entertaining dynamic between Tom Hiddleston's Loki and Thor, and impressive visual effects. The movie was left wide, wide open for another sequel, which I look forward to seeing, and overall, it was well worth eight bucks to watch in theaters.
Thanks for reading!
Peace.
Matt~
Hey, I have question about Thor's inner conflict. Wouldn't the fact that he has to decide between Jane and his becoming king be a sort of inner conflict? Or is it too short-lived, as it is really only talked about at the end? Or maybe I'm mis-interpreting it:)
ReplyDeleteI'd say it was way too short-lived and not made the center of the story. If his flaw had been selfishness, then there would have been a real inner turmoil, because he would have to choose one or the other, and face losing at least one.
DeleteHowever, not every good story HAS to have a flaw or inner struggle. There are a lot of good, fun movies (Like this one) that have plenty of excitement to keep it going, and a likable enough character to keep us watching. Thriller movies like this are almost entirely physical plot and little emotional story or impact, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with them. I just prefer stories where the protagonist has an inner struggle to a pure plot story, that's all. :)
Thanks for commenting! :)
Sure and thanks for explaining:) It helped clear some things up.
ReplyDeleteUm, so I know it's kind of late, but I have another question about Thor.
ReplyDeleteI was talking with my dad the other day, and we came up with a possibility for Thor's internal conflict. We said that Thor is fighting with what it means to be a good man, and he is a dynamic character because, at the end of the movie, he seems more caring and loyal to what he believes is right. In fact, he becomes a little more like Captain America, who is a very strong and moral character (at least compared to the other super heroes I've seen). Is this true? In Thor 1, he struggles with this at even a greater level, but I still see it in the second movie.
I'm not doing the greatest job at wording this, as it's the morning here, but I hope you can make sense of it:)
Please let me know if my thoughts are incorrect. :D
Good thinking! Yes, I think that that would fall under insecurity, the doubt of one's situation, or something close to it, although again, I (Just my personal thought) think it could have been presented better--meaning it should have been kept front and center. The protagonist overcomes his flaw and is able to defeat the antagonist as a result of his inner change, which is why I feel like his flaw could and should have been more central to the story.
DeleteAgain, though, movies with more physical plot than emotional story, like this one, can be just as fun and enjoyable as others, it's all a matter of preference.
Hopefully this helps and good work analyzing the movie! The more you study films and books for story elements (Story structure etc.), the better you get at applying those elements. :D
Okay, thanks!
ReplyDelete