That's accurate. We probably know more females in the Jane Foster archetype then Lady Sif archetype. It's probably why, given the choice, most would go for Sif. I'm sure Thor actual has the same issue.
I could more justify Thor picking Sif if Jane was different, but an idiot (or Darcy.) She's not. He's had interesting conversations with her & she made him 'grow up' in the first movie. She arguably made him a better man. Its no wonder he fell in love with her instead of Sif.
Good points all.
I love it when you show your sensitive side. B-)
It's not a "sensitive side"...its a "less manly side then the rest!"
While I get that idle speculation about the sex of superheroes is a part of fandom that is easy to ridicule (and I am guilty of making fun of it, or being embarrassed by that element of fandom myself) lets keep the dose of perspective that people are actually talking about a part of this movie they saw. This love story is screen time, and will either work for us or not just as much as, say, the complicated brother/enemy relationship between Thor and Loki (which, if you asks me, the fraternal love story in this movie has worked worlds better than the romantic one!)
To say that you didn't buy the love story- and it is something given not a small amount of screen time- is a valid criticism whether you are talking about Thor and Jane or Rick and Ilsa in Casablanca. At the end of the day, if you don't buy into the chemistry, then the character motivations might not ring true.
I mean, don't get me wrong, take a step back and it is sort of hilarious to talk about the chemistry between Thor and Jane. I get what is funny about that. But, here's the thing- they are making movies that include that love story now. So it is on them to sell us on that love story. And whether it not they did is as much a thing for an audience to judge as whether the violence was exciting.
I think perspective is exactly what @Matt was offering when he commented on the silliness of the "Thor should bang the hottest one" comments.
But my trying to rationalize Thor's choice of a love interest is, I believe, classic fan speculation and far less silly than much of what we discuss here.
And if it is silly, so what? Being a super hero fan is at its core, an exercise in silliness. If you're ashamed of your hobby, or to be associated with those of us who share your bobby, perhaps you should sell your little plastic men and your funny books and buy some golf clubs and ugly pants.
Not at all! The geek hand is strong! I absolutley want people to like what they like and be who they are. i have loved comic books since i could read and there is not a trace of shame in that statement.
Not at all! The geek hand is strong! I absolutley want people to like what they like and be who they are. i have loved comic books since i could read and there is not a trace of shame in that statement.
But...sometimes we get goofy about it. thats all.
I generally find the goofy endearing.
There was a point when I was younger, when I found the "goofier" members of our tribe annoying, but mostly now I find their enthusiasm sweet.
I admit, though, I will occasionally emulate the grumpy old alpha and give the back of my paw to an unruly pup. But I try to make it a learning moment when I do.
Not at all! The geek hand is strong! I absolutley want people to like what they like and be who they are. i have loved comic books since i could read and there is not a trace of shame in that statement.
But...sometimes we get goofy about it. thats all.
I generally find the goofy endearing.
There was a point when I was younger, when I found the "goofier" members of our tribe annoying, but mostly now I find their enthusiasm sweet.
I admit, though, I will occasionally emulate the grumpy old alpha and give the back of my paw to an unruly pup. But I try to make it a learning moment when I do.
As for the mid-credits bonus scene, yes, I am also intrigued: if we saw the Infinity Gauntlet WITH Infinity gem stones in Odin's trophy room in the first THOR movie, then why is the Marvel Cinematic Universe suddenly referring to the Aether and the Tesseract/Cosmic Cube as Infinity "gems?"
it just an illusion to keep up the appearances that the Asgardians have it.. when it looks like they do not.
As for the mid-credits bonus scene, yes, I am also intrigued: if we saw the Infinity Gauntlet WITH Infinity gem stones in Odin's trophy room in the first THOR movie, then why is the Marvel Cinematic Universe suddenly referring to the Aether and the Tesseract/Cosmic Cube as Infinity "gems?"
it just an illusion to keep up the appearances that the Asgardians have it.. when it looks like they do not.
Awesome, but am I the only one starting to get concerned that the GotG film is going to ruin Marvel's recent good streak? This looks like a cut scene from Red Dwarf... low point of the film.
Awesome, but am I the only one starting to get concerned that the GotG film is going to ruin Marvel's recent good streak? This looks like a cut scene from Red Dwarf... low point of the film.
Saw it on Friday - in an empty theater, surprisingly. Is that typical for a 4 o'clock showing on a Friday? Or is Baton Rouge just not much of a movie town? I got there a half hour early to get a good seat, and I was literally the only person in an auditorium-sized theater.
Anyway, I've come to accept that the Thor movies, while fun and competently made, are just not going to aim as high as the rest of the films. Maybe they're going more for kids, but it just feels like they never dig deep enough to go beyond just telling a solid, fast-paced adventure story. That's fine, but it's like David D said - this could be Lord of the Rings, but it seems content to settle for less.
I did enjoy it, though, and felt it was a definite step up from the first film. Asgard looked a little more lived-in and real this time. Even Anthony Hopkins' Odin looked less cartoonish. Hemsworth seems more confident as an actor. HIddleston was great as always. I wish Eccleston's character had a bit more weight to justify casting him, but much of the threat felt like it was just there to move things along, kept as generic as possible to give the characters room to develop.
I think if the Thor/Jane relationship doesn't work for some, it's likely because Portman supposedly isn't too keen on doing the films, and I think it shows. I wouldn't be surprised to see her recast once her contract runs out.
So, worth the time, and I enjoyed it, but like the first one, it falls somewhere in the lower scale of Marvel films for me.
And the 3D - not worth the money, in my opinion. If I hadn't had a pass, I wouldn't have bothered.
I don't know what to think of that post-credits sequence. Guardians will either be great, or a total train wreck. It's the first Marvel film that's had me concerned that they're making a wrong move. Following it with Ant Man makes me worry that they're picking the wrong projects.
Awesome, but am I the only one starting to get concerned that the GotG film is going to ruin Marvel's recent good streak? This looks like a cut scene from Red Dwarf... low point of the film.
Saw it on Friday - in an empty theater, surprisingly. Is that typical for a 4 o'clock showing on a Friday? Or is Baton Rouge just not much of a movie town? I got there a half hour early to get a good seat, and I was literally the only person in an auditorium-sized theater.
I saw it at 4:10 (the last of the cheap times) and it was pretty full and I live in central PA. I have seen movies where I was the only one there, it's both cool and creepy.
Saw it on Friday - in an empty theater, surprisingly. Is that typical for a 4 o'clock showing on a Friday? Or is Baton Rouge just not much of a movie town? I got there a half hour early to get a good seat, and I was literally the only person in an auditorium-sized theater.
I saw it at 4:10 (the last of the cheap times) and it was pretty full and I live in central PA. I have seen movies where I was the only one there, it's both cool and creepy.
JP
I think movies just aren't that big around here, because it's not an uncommon occurrence. It just surprised me to see it happen with a new release like Thor. Although, I saw Peter Jackson's King Kong at 7:00 on its opening night, and there were less than half a dozen people.
I've never had to pre-order a ticket to see something on opening night since moving to Baton Rouge. I had to do that all the time in Chicago and New Orleans, or else I wouldn't be seeing anything opening weekend.
Saw it out here in Pottstown pa on a Sunday large theater at 2:30 on a lite rain day and there were about 12-15 people in their big premo theater. Not 3d. I liked it, but now that I have had some time to think about it, I think it was fun but not as awesome as I was expecting. I wanted more Thor and Asgard stuff and not so much Portman and friends. Thor and Loki were great together and Balder kicks ass. I just feel like something was missing. I don't even remember the soundtrack and I am a big fan of film scores.
Saw it on Friday - in an empty theater, surprisingly. Is that typical for a 4 o'clock showing on a Friday? Or is Baton Rouge just not much of a movie town? I got there a half hour early to get a good seat, and I was literally the only person in an auditorium-sized theater.
I saw it at 4:10 (the last of the cheap times) and it was pretty full and I live in central PA. I have seen movies where I was the only one there, it's both cool and creepy.
JP
I think movies just aren't that big around here, because it's not an uncommon occurrence. It just surprised me to see it happen with a new release like Thor. Although, I saw Peter Jackson's King Kong at 7:00 on its opening night, and there were less than half a dozen people.
I've never had to pre-order a ticket to see something on opening night since moving to Baton Rouge. I had to do that all the time in Chicago and New Orleans, or else I wouldn't be seeing anything opening weekend.
I be willing to go to the movie with you if it's empty ... how far is Baton Rouge from Lancaster PA?
I wanted to add my bizarre experience that occurred while watching the show. Right before the lights dimmed a horribly obese woman waddled into the place alone and sat a few rows away. When the scene with Thor shirtless and washing off appeared. When that came on, she shrieked and started crying, balling out her eyes and shaking like a cell phone ringing on a table. This would occur periodically throughout the film. At the very end credit she started to laugh hysterically and prolonged. I thought that she was "challenged" but after careful scrutiny she's just nutty as a fruit cake. Very distracting film experience.
They were very much a late seventies Ginger & Mary Ann.
Jennifer was an over the top sexpot who dated a series of extremely wealthy, extremely ancient men who gave her expensive things.
Bailey was the classic bespectacled beauty, always dressed down and was sweet, good, and largely invisible to all the guys who drooled over Jennifer.
Okay, I would definitely take Bailey over Jennifer. Apparently, the guy I thought was Les was actually Herb. I also didn't realize how topical the show was. Oh, and I recall it be funnier.
They were very much a late seventies Ginger & Mary Ann.
Jennifer was an over the top sexpot who dated a series of extremely wealthy, extremely ancient men who gave her expensive things.
Bailey was the classic bespectacled beauty, always dressed down and was sweet, good, and largely invisible to all the guys who drooled over Jennifer.
Okay, I would definitely take Bailey over Jennifer. Apparently, the guy I thought was Les was actually Herb. I also didn't realize how topical the show was. Oh, and I recall it be funnier.
They were very much a late seventies Ginger & Mary Ann.
Jennifer was an over the top sexpot who dated a series of extremely wealthy, extremely ancient men who gave her expensive things.
Bailey was the classic bespectacled beauty, always dressed down and was sweet, good, and largely invisible to all the guys who drooled over Jennifer.
Okay, I would definitely take Bailey over Jennifer. Apparently, the guy I thought was Les was actually Herb. I also didn't realize how topical the show was. Oh, and I recall it be funnier.
Comments
M
Bravo.
To say that you didn't buy the love story- and it is something given not a small amount of screen time- is a valid criticism whether you are talking about Thor and Jane or Rick and Ilsa in Casablanca. At the end of the day, if you don't buy into the chemistry, then the character motivations might not ring true.
I mean, don't get me wrong, take a step back and it is sort of hilarious to talk about the chemistry between Thor and Jane. I get what is funny about that. But, here's the thing- they are making movies that include that love story now. So it is on them to sell us on that love story. And whether it not they did is as much a thing for an audience to judge as whether the violence was exciting.
But...sometimes we get goofy about it. thats all.
Golf is a good walk...spoiled.
There was a point when I was younger, when I found the "goofier" members of our tribe annoying, but mostly now I find their enthusiasm sweet.
I admit, though, I will occasionally emulate the grumpy old alpha and give the back of my paw to an unruly pup. But I try to make it a learning moment when I do.
M
http://businessinsider.com/marvel-movies-need-another-loki-2013-11?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=emailshare
But yeah.
Ugh.
Anyway, I've come to accept that the Thor movies, while fun and competently made, are just not going to aim as high as the rest of the films. Maybe they're going more for kids, but it just feels like they never dig deep enough to go beyond just telling a solid, fast-paced adventure story. That's fine, but it's like David D said - this could be Lord of the Rings, but it seems content to settle for less.
I did enjoy it, though, and felt it was a definite step up from the first film. Asgard looked a little more lived-in and real this time. Even Anthony Hopkins' Odin looked less cartoonish. Hemsworth seems more confident as an actor. HIddleston was great as always. I wish Eccleston's character had a bit more weight to justify casting him, but much of the threat felt like it was just there to move things along, kept as generic as possible to give the characters room to develop.
I think if the Thor/Jane relationship doesn't work for some, it's likely because Portman supposedly isn't too keen on doing the films, and I think it shows. I wouldn't be surprised to see her recast once her contract runs out.
So, worth the time, and I enjoyed it, but like the first one, it falls somewhere in the lower scale of Marvel films for me.
And the 3D - not worth the money, in my opinion. If I hadn't had a pass, I wouldn't have bothered.
I don't know what to think of that post-credits sequence. Guardians will either be great, or a total train wreck. It's the first Marvel film that's had me concerned that they're making a wrong move. Following it with Ant Man makes me worry that they're picking the wrong projects.
M
http://www.tumblr.com/blog/bralinator
JP
I've never had to pre-order a ticket to see something on opening night since moving to Baton Rouge. I had to do that all the time in Chicago and New Orleans, or else I wouldn't be seeing anything opening weekend.
JP
I'd rather have to decide between these two ...
Uploaded with ImageShack.com
M
M