I didn’t really understand what was behind Thor, the superhero and his movies. And why was Natalie Portman in them?
I went and found out.
Up this week: three reviews of Thor, the Dark World, sequel to Thor. I commend the different ways the critics have found to describe red liquid.
By Tom Long
Spoilers: Sounds like it gives away all plot developments, and there ain’t too many.
Plot: Thor is from Planet Asgard, which is under attack by evil elves. On earth Natalie Portman is studying the “floating red ether stuff” that the elves use to obliterate all of humanity.
The Takeaway: D+. Neither funny nor fun, there is no point in watching it. Too much time on Asgard, not enough on Earth.
Listen Tom Long, if you hate the movie, is it really necessary to give all the plot points away, especially given that there seem to be so few? Just be yourself, hate it, and move on to the next review.
By Mick LaSalle
Spoilers: LaSalle uses way too many to support his opinion.
Plot: Thor is prince on Asgard, Natalie a scientist on Earth. Natalie is researching a “red, churning substance” that makes the elves evil.
The Takeaway: The first Thor was better in every way: the directors were better, the score’s composer was better, the tension between Thor and Natalie Portman was better, the battle scenes were better.
Spoilers: Too many.
Plot: Ditto the above–Elves, Asgard; Natalie, Earth. “Otherworldly floating goo” has got to go.
The Takeaway: Not a must-see, but still better than the first Thor. It’s funnier.
- Holy Asgard Batman! (snapcracklepopcultbr.wordpress.com)
- The Videogum Movie Club: Thor: The Dark World (videogum.com)
- Movie Review: Thor 2 (blogs.abc.net.au)
- Spoilery Thor: The Dark World Review (audacioustitans.wordpress.com)