Jump to content
Bazza

Marvel Cinematic Universe, Phase Three and BEYOOOOONND

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Ranxerox said:

 

No, Bond will continue to be Daniel Craig.  Lashana Lynch will be playing a different spy who is given the 007 designation after Bond chooses to retire.  I've yet to come across anyone who thinks that Bond will stay retired or that Lynch's character will keep the 007 position.  Indeed, pretty much everyone thinks she will be shot.

Perhaps I really don’t know for sure. If the movie goes in that direction do you really think that there still won’t be “outrage”? Bond finally broke the mold only to be killed-the agony. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, megaplayboy said:

or they recast James Bond and come up with some gobbledygook about how "James Bond" is now a perennial "cover ID" for the 007 agent.

 

You know James Bond is Time Lord... right? 

 

https://www.tor.com/2012/11/16/skyfall-proves-that-james-bond-is-a-time-lord/

 

It really is the only explanation that works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

My kids and I enjoyed Ragnarok! But I have a friend whose a big Thor fan and didn’t enjoy it as much. Ymmv naturally.

 

Comic-book Thor has long been my favorite superhero. Hemsworth started out close to him, but isn't any longer. I realize I'm biased, and I don't care. 😛

 

Of all non-comic media, Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes came closest to conveying that Thor.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Comic-book Thor has long been my favorite superhero. Hemsworth started out close to him, but isn't any longer. I realize I'm biased, and I don't care. 😛

 

Of all non-comic media, Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes came closest to conveying that Thor.

 

That’s who I think my buddy didn’t care for the way Thor went too.  My kids and I aren’t as invested So the switch wasn’t as bad. Plus I heard it was because of the shift in tone is a reason why Hemmsworth stayed with Thor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its clear that while Hemsworth looks like Thor and can play him pretty well, he does not have the personality to play Thor, which is unfortunate.  I think if someone really liked that kind of role and sold it well, it would have been well received.  The Simonson run on Thor is still beloved and was a huge seller, people loved it.  It can work, but you gotta have someone playing the role who wants to be that guy and really sells it.  Hemsworth is not that guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought he sold it well early on, the general audience just didn't respond to it with enough enthusiasm.  Going full Shakespeare would have given the nobility aspect a needed boost, but IMO would have also confused casual fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have to say that the general public don't really read comics anymore, so Hemsworth's performance as Thor is basically what they know and expect. I personally haven't read a Thor comic in about 40 years, so I can't really comment on the nuances of the comics, nor could most of the folks who bought tickets to Thor: Ragnarok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Its clear that while Hemsworth looks like Thor and can play him pretty well, he does not have the personality to play Thor, which is unfortunate.  I think if someone really liked that kind of role and sold it well, it would have been well received.  The Simonson run on Thor is still beloved and was a huge seller, people loved it.  It can work, but you gotta have someone playing the role who wants to be that guy and really sells it.  Hemsworth is not that guy.

 

I believe that he does, and handled it well at first. The problem was that after his debut, the movie writers couldn't figure out where to go with him. Looking at his first two starring movies and first two Avengers films, Thor is always a reactive character. He reacts to his father, to his brother, to his lover, to the villains he fights. There was no sense of what his own motivations are, no apparent character growth. It's why Chris Hemsworth was getting bored and frustrated in the role.

 

7 minutes ago, Ternaugh said:

I'd have to say that the general public don't really read comics anymore, so Hemsworth's performance as Thor is basically what they know and expect. I personally haven't read a Thor comic in about 40 years, so I can't really comment on the nuances of the comics, nor could most of the folks who bought tickets to Thor: Ragnarok.

 

I believe you're right. I don't have to like it though. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that Jane Foster was The Mighty Thor during 4 of the 7 years that Jason Aaron was writing the book, and given that the story was one of the better Thor storylines to come along in quite some time, I find more reasons to be optimistic than pessimistic about the fourth Thor movie.


As for why Natalie Portman would agree to do this, well, it seems pretty obvious to me. This is a great opportunity for her and she knows it. This is a role with far more dramatic potential than the romantic-interest/damsel-in-distress character she was stuck playing before. Besides, the MCU is a far more prestigious franchise today than when the first two Thor movies were made, and Oscar winners are now lining up to be a part of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

And another superhero universe must now face the Cassandra Prophecy of Doom. :angst:

 

And thank goodness they got rid of that box office poison Chris Hemsworth.  Right up there with the X-Men not wanting Hugh Jackman around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Its clear that while Hemsworth looks like Thor and can play him pretty well, he does not have the personality to play Thor, which is unfortunate.  I think if someone really liked that kind of role and sold it well, it would have been well received.  The Simonson run on Thor is still beloved and was a huge seller, people loved it.  It can work, but you gotta have someone playing the role who wants to be that guy and really sells it.  Hemsworth is not that guy.

 

I think Hemsworth did pretty well with what he was given.  The problem that I see is that solo-Thor is Shakespearean high fantasy, and Avengers-Thor is either an unrelatable cosmic cipher or a straight man.  And Cap was already the straight man.  So they split the difference and made MCU Thor a drunken bar brawler with a good heart.  It works great for the MCU, but I can see why it would annoy hardcore Thor fans.

 

It's similar in many ways to the difficulty of writing Superman--the problem of creating a relatable character out of an invincible alien god.  The only person who can really defeat Thor is Thor, so that tends to happen a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...