What went right? What do you guys think?

This is my favorite Marvel film yet. It was so awesome

I disliked it the least of all marvel movies
Kudos to that i guess

+focus on comedic elements
+good chemistry
+dom blanchett
+mini redemption arc

-too high stakes + muh refugees
-too silly at times

I'll let you know when the yify rip is available.
disney dont need my money so they wont get it.

there is a watchable cam out. but if you want to wait until a good rip is up i wont blame you

it was shit, the only good thing was the snake story

>-too high stakes
but heres the kickers, the stakes wernt high in the first place it was a red herring, it was resloved in the last 10 minuites like every marvel shit fest holy fockin hell the thing that was gonna be "bad" was actualy "good" and always ment to happen anyway .........

>Too high stakes
I mean each movie only gets progressively higher in stakes. I don't see how destroying Asgard with the prophecized end of the world isn't a step in the right direction after Ultron "going to destroy your world" schtick.

>Muh refugees
Hardly a point to complain about. They didn't make it about Asgardians being refugees at all.

Other than that pretty spot on.

This.
Also: out-of-the-world stuff like Fenris, Surtur etc
Thor x Loki relationship

poorfag

>calling someone a poorfag over a movie ticket
lad, I think youre a bit stupid.

enjoy being poor faggot

Stakes were high because Hela wining would mean she would attempt to keep conquering shit, including earth. Ragnarok was the solution to that because thor and company wouldnt be able to defeat her

The problem is that there is not much left to go up from "conquering everything".

Yet when Thanos is going to attempt to conquer everything and kill masses of beings after getting the 6 most powerful items in the known universe that's not high stakes?

thats my point. there is only more "conquer everything" and "kill everything" left.
I don't think its necessary to have such high stakes plots for good movies.

K O R G

Taika is genuinely funnier than all other marvel directors + Hemsworth has perfect delivery.

Which is why most Marvel movies aren't that way.

taika is good at comedy and doesn't use TVesque whedon-speak to set up jokes. thats certainly a plus

Nowhere near as good as WS or GotG1

and Hela wanting to take over Asgard is a sufficiently strong pretext for the plot. which is why i think amping up the stakes was unnecessary and felt tired

was at least 24% better than WS and 95% better than both GotG movies combined

Honestly I felt like they overdid it with the colors. I don't get why some brutal alien gladiator slaves live in brightly colored cheerful high tech rooms.

>Marvel execs hadn’t heard Immigrant Song until Taika Waititi played it for them
The absolute state of the Mouse.

WS was absolute shit, though. It's only loved by self-loathing comic book fans who are so insecure they feel like they have to enjoy what is in their opinion a "not comic book" movie.

its a comedy, doofus

And that still makes it 96.7% worst then any movie this year. I'd say it's on par with Emoji movie, slightly worst.

Lol enjoy your autism, fatass.

jesus christ

probably but im not invested on emoji-IP enough to care for it
If sony had started doing emoji serialized soap operas since the 70s, it may have been different

She was failing at taking over Asgard and its people. There are hardly any beings, known or unknown, capable of taking her down. How would you deal with this situation without destroying Asgard or something similar in scale?

>tfw no Hela queen to worship

im not talking about ragnarok, but about the plot points introducing her as a warmongering conquest-nut that would go on trying to take over other kingdoms/plants/etc if she wasnt stopped

The colors were unnatural, and so was the physics of the CGI.

Well yeah, the stakes have to increase throughout the movie, or it's boring. When they start out with high stakes, they don't leave anyplace to go so they have to shoehorn it in.

I feel like I'm missing half of a post here because nothing about this post makes any sense with respect to my post that you're replying to.

im talking about stakes
you think ragnarok was a stake, but its not. it was just a plot device
the threat of universal conquest was the stakes (if they fail etc)

Assuming Ragnarok wasn't a stake, which is was, again I ask how would you deal with the plot knowing that she was failing at conquering Asgard and it's people and she was becoming more dangerous? You claim the way the movie handled it was poor so please do enlighten us on how it should or could have been done.

gotg, gotg2, ant-man, doctor strange, iron man 2, captain america 2 where all better

Basically spend the first 25 minutes moving at the speed of light to throw out everything about the previous Thor movies. Loki taking over Asgard is a gag resolved in a few minutes. Strange only appears as a plot device to stop any searching Thor and Loki would have to do. Jane is mentioned offhand. Two of the three Thor pals are killed off completely unceremoniously, the third kind gets to put up a fight. Hela herself has absolutely zero buildup, could have easily had Surtur mention her in the opening scene to set things up. Instead you have Odin introduce her and have it payoff three seconds after he disintegrates.

And it was still the most entertaining Thor movie. Comedy actually has good setup, payoff, and timing. None of that smug Whedon snark or Guardians' overlong "THIS IS JOKE" writing. While there's not much in the way of character growth the interaction between the cast is a lot more organic than it has been. While I don't hate Marvel's other stuff where they go hard on the comedy at the expense of pathos, those movies are definitely fall under "one and done" for me. I would actually watch Ragnarok again, it's just a shame the movie had to rush its cleanup of the Thor franchises previous baggage.

>Well yeah, the stakes have to increase throughout the movie, or it's boring.
maybe in this kind of movie genre that could be true, but not generally. great movies or even literary stories can and have been told without near endless escalation of consequences.

>failing at conquering Asgard
she took over it pretty much alone in days. the only pockets of resistance left were cornered and nearly ready to die. her conflict there was not whether she could conquer it or not, but about getting the key to the rainbow bridge for easy access to pretty much anywhere

i would have simply removed the expansionist plot points to make it about thor and company trying to vanish evil from their home, and yes, possibly failing at it.

I'd never heard of it either. It's not one of the most famous songs of all time.

She wanted not just Asgard but the people too along with the sword, the latter two she failed at. As she grew desperate, she was willing to cause more destruction, hence Ragnarok was a necessary evil to stop her. Totally justified and not too high of stakes at all. And your changes basically makes the third movie about the worst parts of the first two, so congratulations on that.

It absolutely is one of the most famous songs of all time. You must be living under a rock if you don't recognize it.

It's been used quite often in pop-culture

>It absolutely is one of the most famous songs of all time.
It absolutely is not.

>It's been used quite often in pop-culture
In what? Because I remember an article expressing how impressed they were that Marvel convinced them to let them use it.

>she failed at
she ran out of time because of Ragnarok, basically
>causing destruction of out desperation
she is the goddess of death. destruction was always in the cards
>ragarok=necessary evil
ragnarok is a cyclical occurrence. ragnarok always comes so its not really about avoiding it, but using it wisely (this is a plot point from the comics) thor used it to actually save, NOT ASGARD, but THE UNIVERSE, from Hela

in my take, its simply unnecessary to expand to threat to the whole universe

How many people lived on Asgard? 500-600?

How is it not when most of society has heard it?

She didn't run out of time because of Ragnarok. Ragnarok was caused to stop her. Destruction was only in the cards to help her cause. Otherwise she wouldn't have done it just for the sake of it. Plus, how do you even know it's cyclical? Nothing in the movie states it happens every x years. You have yet to prove how it's unnecessary when it's the clear next step in big threads in the MCU.

Most of Marvel's fanbase are too young to have ever heard a Zepplin song.

Most Zepplin songs, sure. Immigrant Song? Most people at least recognize the riff.

>How is it not when most of society has heard it?
This is a baseless assertion though.

>She didn't run out of time because of Ragnarok. Ragnarok was caused to stop her.
either your thinking on this is not very clear, or you are just attempting to nitpick grammar at this point
>Destruction was only in the cards to help her cause.
and her cause was conquest. destruction is an inherent part of it
>Plus, how do you even know it's cyclical?
how literal does a story have to be for you read into the subtext. there are literal layers of old, completely distinct asgard history buried under modern asgard. Hela was part of that old version of asgard, a remnant, that was about to remake it as it was again, until she got ragnaroked

regardless of what causes it, in the comics thor mythos ragnarok always ends with the destruction of the old, making way for the new, it seems to be those concepts got imported into the MCU

Not anymore than it would be to assume most people haven't.

You're assuming Ragnarok was on a set timer. It wasn't. Therefore, she couldn't have run out of time. Destruction isn't inherent if people choose to follow her willingly. There is no subtext to read into here, Ragnarok didn't happen before, therefore it's not cyclical, and nothing in this universe points to it being so.

>You're assuming Ragnarok was on a set timer. It wasn't. Therefore, she couldn't have run out of time. Destruction isn't inherent if people choose to follow her willingly. There is no subtext to read into here, Ragnarok didn't happen before, therefore it's not cyclical, and nothing in this universe points to it being so.

I guess we disagree because we are very different kinds of viewers. I see a lot of subtext and you maybe dont see any.

To me Taika was being pretty explicit in showing old warmongering asgard buried under new progressive asgard, as giving us a hint of the cyclical nature of Asgard itself, and bringing it in like with how the story is told on the comics (where ragnarok has happened about 7 times).

No, you are just reading into things that aren't there. Whatever happens in the comics is in no way directly related to what happens in the movies. But go ahead and assume Hela ran out of time even though she was stopped by a spontaneous event, that'll really hold up well.

>spontaneous event
>literally prophesied verbatim
Lol
I guess we are done with rational discussion.
By the way, i can see why you would think what you think about the movie and the plot, but i honestly believe that if you were more familiar with the thing its based on (the marvel stuff), you would also be unpacking a lot more from it.

...

HOL UP
What happened to the Infinity Stones on Asguard? Did Loki snatch them up before it got nuked by Sutur or are them floating around in space?

>Thor randomly deciding to start Ragnarok at that given moment
>Not spontaneous

If a person decides to randomly jump out of a window, is it not a spontaneous suicide despite the fact that gravity is always going to be there? Same concept applies here. Maybe you need to do more "subtext" reading to understand.

based 9608 poster
what do you even mean when you post this?

Hela says they were fakes
"half things here [the room with all the dangerous shit] are fakes"

He totally stole them.

Only one stone, aka the one inside the Tesseract. It's very clear that he stole it for Thanos by the way he looked at it but no way in hell would he let Thor or anybody else know he has it.

Thats the thing about prophecies.
If there is a prophecy about a suicide taking place in very specific circumstances on a magical world where "destiny" exists, and that suicide happens in a way that the circumstances happen too... its not spontaneous

Oy vey saying asgard isn't a place it's a people is incredibly nationalistic

Good thing gravity is Ragnarok in my analogy then otherwise you might have had a point.

I remember see the Red Floating Thing as well as the Glowing Blue Cube.

Doesn't the collector have the Aether?

>short hair thor

i hope you are just trying to bait me at this point man. this is sad, at some point it looked like you truly wanted to talk about stuff

kinda disappointing that Asgard security forces never sent a Destroyer after her.

Loki hands thanos the tesseract in the infinity war trailer

I don't see how it's bait explaining to you how starting Ragnarok was spontaneous even when there was a prophecy stating it would occur. Very simple concept to grasp.

It's the climax of the Thor movies. The stakes should be high.

And technically the stakes weren't even as high as in Thor 2 where Malekith was going to wipe out all light in the universe or something.

Anyone else notice that Odin's eye patch was entirely CGI? Or that you could see Thor's "destroyed" eye" through the CGI for most of the time it was on screen?

I wish somebody else other than marlets or dcucks commented on this movie. all posts are either "it's the BEST movie ever, BEST marvel movie it's a MASTERPIECE" or "wow it was absolute TRASH this was GARBAGE lmao quips and cgi kys"
I honestly thought it was entertaining but mediocre, 5/10

>spontaneous: performed or occurring as a result of a sudden inner impulse or inclination and without premeditation or external stimulus.

in the movie, ragnarok happens specifically not only because thor is aware of the prophecy, but also aware of how Hela's powers work.

your gravity analogy is, plainly put, retarded, because you are comparing a prophesy with common knowledge of how gravity works while ignoring the scope of what is being predicted:

one predicts downfall of your homelands in a very specific manner, the other predicts things with more mass attract things with less mass but this attraction is not a prescription, you can escape the pull of gravity, you cannot escape a prophecy

i didnt think you where dumb before dude, but the more you reply to me the more i think you are extremely simple minded

Thor suddenly deciding to start Ragnarok is spontaneous. Doesn't matter if Ragnarok is bound to happen or not. And the gravity analogy works, because it's always there. Doesn't matter if you can escape gravity, it's still going to pull on you, just like how Ragnarok is always going to happen, although how and when you are most susceptible to those things may be up to you. And I like how you call me simple minded when you have to misrepresent what I'm saying in order to try to prove me wrong. Great logic there.

I never said most people haven't, I said it's not one of the 'most famous songs of all time'.

you are forgetting what "spontaneus" means.

you are forgetting thor decided to start ragnarok for a reason and with prior knowledge of it, which precludes any spontaneity

you forget gravity and other natural forces can be "turned off" technologically and mystically in this MCU setting while prophecies cannot be "turned off" ever, making it a false equivalence

im now convinced you are a retard and im done replying

I know what spontaneous means and have been using it correctly.

Having a reason to do something and knowing how something works doesn't negate spontaneity.

I literally said how gravity is always working (aka can never be "turned off"), which is one of the most basic ideas taught to kids in school. Sorry you slept through that class.

But go ahead and call me a retard for you not understanding things that I'm spelling out for you.

Will you guys get back to arguing about whether or not the MCU is undermining their own storytelling by constantly raising the stakes instead of the fact that this idiot doesn't know what the word "spontaneous" means?

Yeah, what the fuck was that? I keep asking people if they noticed and I was starting to think I was crazy. The Thor eye thing is forgivable, but what was up with Odin? Did Tony Hop just not want to wear an eye patch?

just bored mostly

I honestly didn't see any if this. I mean, the eyepatch in particular looked pretty damn real, it was even placed kinda awkwardly above the cheek so it wouldn't move while he was talking

It was just another bland addidtion to the marvel capeshit franchise. But hey, at least it had some funny kiwi humour.

Fucking loved Thor 3. It was the funniest out of all the Marvel movies, but also the best paced. The first act was so deft that I was genuinely excited when Hulk turned up despite knowing the plot in advance. Also, there were some fantastic visuals, and the bloke from Devo turned it a pretty great soundtrack too.

Absolutely
Probably the first really good soundtrack in an MCU movie. Probably the most quips too but at least they were funnier than Whedon's.

Thor 3>1>2

It's because the quips were done by a guy who's actually great at comedy.

rumor is hopkins was cgi entirely

NEW ZEALAND PRESENT

m-muh!