Went to see Thor last night

Because only losers watch films after they've aired in cinemas, right Wingers?

Superbuu3 wrote:

I thought this was pretty good. Didn't particularly enjoy Natalie Portman's character, it always leaves a bad impression on me when i can't remember a characters name. Whoever the guy who played Loki was, did it great though and generally speaking thought Hemsworth was good. End fight irritated me for being anticlimactic certainly had its moments all round though. I really wanted Hawkeye to do something.

Compared to Captain America this seemed amazing as i just couldn't get into it and was really disappointed by some really bad script decisions. I was waiting the whole film for something superheroesque to happen but it just didn't seem to deliver. Oh yeah and the bit with Bucky really annoyed me.

I liked Thor more than Cap too, but both are way better than Iron Man 2 and Hulk

I retract my opening sentiments. Thor was boring and worse than Iron Man 2.

Also Cap was great.

Captain America was certainly a good movie, but it didn't have much in the way of superheroics, Thor had a fair bit of that despite the whole 'Thor has no powers and must regain his valour' thing.

Cap was better in other ways, but as far as a superhero movie goes, I liked Thor better.

We can all agree Iron Man is the king shit of the pre-Avengers Marvel movies though.

Superbuu3 wrote:

Didn't particularly enjoy Natalie Portman's character, it always leaves a bad impression on me when i can't remember a characters name.

Jane Foster, the medic lady Thor likes in A:EMH

Captain America isn't a superhero, so I don't see why his movie needs to have those genre tropes. He is an overpowered soldier and his comic is basically a crime thriller.

But he can defeat the Hulk, that make him super

Well he's certainly not your average hero, he's a super soldier; that's more or less a superhero in my book.

You're right though, his movie doesn't need flashy, explosive battles like Iron Man and Thor, which is why it was still great in its own right.

Thor was better than IM2, Kaio, you know this to be true.

Also, Cap being less 'super' than some of his colleagues was certainly noticable in Avengers - when Iron Man, Thor and Hulk are taking out numerous small fry in seconds, and Hulk is one-shotting the huge worm things, Cap is reduced to taking on foot soldiers. Yet Whedon managed to do it in such a way as to not make him look like he was totally out of his depth.

I preferred IM2 over Thor too.

I tried to watch Thor again a couple of days ago, but I zapped to something else cause I was kinda bored..

whereas a couple of days earlier Iron Man2 was on and I saw it completely..

SimianWonder wrote:

Thor was better than IM2, Kaio, you know this to be true.

RDJ saves it from mediocrity.

Loki was better than that russian guy. Iron Man 3 needs a villain who isn't someone in a copycat Iron Man suit.

Loki was the better villain, but to me Thor lacked something that Iron Man 2 did have.. i can't put my finger on what though..


maybe it's just me liking Robert Downey Jr. so much..

Eevil-Psycho wrote:

maybe it's just me liking Robert Downey Jr. so much..

That's understandable, he's is a very charismatic lead.

Loki was the best villain out of IM 1/2, Thor, Captain America, IH. It's only his disappointing end fight in Thor that bugged me. Then i'd probably place Blinsky second because I thought Tim Roth was great and i didn't even particularly like IH mainly because i've never really been a hulk fan.

Also the main captain america seemed so useless in his movie was that, even thor managed to take out more characters minus powers then cap did. Everytime cap was without his shield they made him look completely useless. Daredevil and Bats aren't super human in terms of there combat and they've appeared to do more on screen.

The other problem is that Chris Evans apparently isn't a very fast runner or a convincing one. The amount they had to speed him up on screen made the scenes look bad. Tim roth running across that field, T 1000 running after the car, both looked naturally a lot faster, i'm more talking about visually here. I also didn't find caps character very likable, and i really like Chris Evans.

Honestly though i'd have to watch the films again to be fairer in my judgement, I didn't have high expectations of thor. I did have high expectations of IM2 and Cap, and both disappointed me a lot.

It's more superhero than Nolan's Batman

Die Hard is more superhero than Nolan's Batman.

Captain America is Peak Human, borderline Super anyway. He's not really meant to be a super hero, but more of a team leader.

Whedon did a good job of making Iron Man and Cap seem strong in their own right, even with Thor and Hulk in it. Even Hawkeye and Black Widow kicked enough ass to look good. He did a good job of keeping the Thor/Hulk fight pretty even before Thor would have used his lightning on him.

Superbuu3 wrote:

I also didn't find caps character very likable, and i really like Chris Evans.

Yeah, same here. To clarify, I liked Cap in his own movie. In Avengers he was a bit too wet for my liking. Again, I really like Chris Evans though, so I can kinda overlook that.

i liked him more as Johnny Storm

Superbuu3 wrote:

It's only his disappointing end fight in Thor that bugged me.

You'll love his final fight in Avengers.