Thor

BArra · 02-05-2011 4:38pm

the most recent 3d film i saw was the green hornet and i really disliked it, found it adjatated me

avatar was the only 3d film i enjoyed

which is better for thor?

02-05-2011 4:39pm

redt0m wrote: »

It is a scam when there is a 2D version out there and your local cinema isn't showing it because then they can charge the extra - money for old rope, that's what it is...

Or maybe you're local were unable to obtain a 2D copy of the film as many cinemas have yet to convert to 3D and as such would be getting prefrence when it came to 2D copies of the film.

02-05-2011 4:40pm

BArra wrote: »

the most recent 3d film i saw was the green hornet and i really disliked it, found it adjatated me

avatar was the only 3d film i enjoyed

which is better for thor?

Green Hornet is an example of a bad film with an even worse conversion. Watching the 2D version of the Green Hornet I was struck by the complete lack of any shots which looked like they were shot so as to make use of the tech. Watching Thor in 2D you can see a number of shots which were obviously composed for 3D.

TheDoc · 02-05-2011 6:51pm

Galvasean wrote: »

A lot of (not unwarranted) 3D bashing going on here, but surely people knew the tacked on 3D would be no good and/or there is a 2D option available?
Personally, (after the Clash of the Titans debacle) I go out of my way to check up on how (un)effective the 3D effects in a movie are before payin to go see it in 3D - much like reading reviews on BluRay transfers. Caveat Emptor.

Similar to the guy above, local cinemas to me are 3D screenings only, 2D screenings at hours not applicable to me working and all

krudler · 02-05-2011 7:12pm

saw it again today with a very impressed 7 year old nephew in tow, he loved it, and I enjoyed it a lot more in 2D, the sound was ridiculously loud though, I like my blockbusters loud but not to the point where people talking is making the speakers rumble and the action scenes were actually painful, especially since there was a lot of kids in the audience

Galvasean · 02-05-2011 8:59pm

What cinema did you see it in Krudler? I saw it in Cineworld (screen 3) and the audio levels were very comfortable.

krudler · 02-05-2011 9:46pm

I'm in Limerick so saw it in the Omniplex, its usually grand in there but christ it was booming for the whole movie. The scenes where the leader of the ice giants was talking the bass in his voice was making the speakers rumble it was so loud.

seraphimvc · 03-05-2011 12:46am

saw it the other day

a good one. nothing outstanding, but nothing bad i can think of. and surprisingly this is almost a 2hrs movie. so this is a well done movie indeed. probably best for family audience with kids etc.

and ohya,regarding the 2D/3D. i am pretty sure you will still enjoy this film in 2D(save you some bucks etc) but IF you are a star gazer fan, you get to see alot pretty starry scenes in the film in 3D, which i enjoyed them very much.

Galvasean · 03-05-2011 2:19am

I'm surprised at the 2 hour run time. It didn't feel that long at all.

humanji · 03-05-2011 9:36am

brianregan09 wrote:

All in all i'm looking forward to The 1st Avenger Captain America and how it will all tie all the others together with Tony Starks dad being in it and references to Cap were already made in the Hulk Movie with Tim Roths character using a variation of the Super Soldier formula to help him fight the Hulk

Captain America also apparently appears in a deleted opening scene of The Incredible Hulk.

krudler wrote: »

saw it again today with a very impressed 7 year old nephew in tow, he loved it, and I enjoyed it a lot more in 2D, the sound was ridiculously loud though, I like my blockbusters loud but not to the point where people talking is making the speakers rumble and the action scenes were actually painful, especially since there was a lot of kids in the audience

I watched it in Movies @ Swords in Dublin last night, and the sound was fairly booming at times. It was a little annoying.

Galvasean wrote: »

I'm surprised at the 2 hour run time. It didn't feel that long at all.

Yeah, it fairly flew by. It was a real easy film to watch. I really loved it. Although, I wasn't too keen on his mates, as they were all twats. Loved the

Hawkeye

appearance, and Stan Lee's cameo made me laugh out loud.

seraphimvc · 03-05-2011 11:43am

humanji wrote: »

Although, I wasn't too keen on his mates, as they were all twats. Loved the
Hawkeye
appearance, and Stan Lee's cameo made me laugh out loud.

i see them as cheeky cosplayers :pac: (costume player) they are mostly for comedy effect i think.

Galvasean · 03-05-2011 2:14pm

humanji wrote: »

Loved the
Hawkeye
appearance,

I missed that! When did he appear?

TheDoc · 03-05-2011 2:20pm

Galvasean wrote: »

I missed that! When did he appear?

Assumed he was the guy with the bow and arrow up on the eagles nest, thought it was a bit of a high profile actor to play such a bit part, assume he will be featuring more in future marvels

And on the sound I'd agree, when the Destroyer was firing his eye beam thingies I was literally rattling in my seat.

On a sidenote watched in UCI Coolock Sunday afternoon, had heard that place went to the dumps a bit but thought it was excellent with lovely seating arrangement, butter popcorn was the attraction in the first place

krudler · 03-05-2011 2:35pm

Galvasean wrote: »

I'm surprised at the 2 hour run time. It didn't feel that long at all.

when Thor is trying to get the hammer back the first time in the SHIELD compound thingy, Jeremy Renner is playing him in The Avengers movie too so it was a nice little setup

mikhail · 03-05-2011 3:20pm

TheDoc wrote: »

Assumed he was the guy with the bow and arrow up on the eagles nest, thought it was a bit of a high profile actor to play such a bit part, assume he will be featuring more in future marvels

Yes, he's even referred to by that name, I think, but his choice of weapon is also an obvious enough pointer.

constitutionus · 03-05-2011 11:11pm

went to see this again today and i have to say i was surprised how much of the action ive forgotten thank to the story being so good.

hiddleston REALLY comes off better the second time around

the subtlety of him setting thor up really stands out when you know he's going to betray him

i went to see this in 2d again as i was put off the 3d version from all the comments here on how irrelevant it was and looking out for it im glad i did as i cant see how the battlescenes on jotenheim could look anything but a murky mess as it was tough going in 2d !

this is actually the first film all year that ive gone to see twice and it holds up well. i think the last was tron 2 .

also

somehow thank to the perspective of the film i didnt cop that it actually WAS the cosmic cube in that breifcase in the after the credits scene. i dont know why but first time around it looked more like a flat plate. anyway thats definetly the captain america link and im well stoked for that film now

Penn · 04-05-2011 4:18pm

Thought this film was actually surprisingly good. Very difficult thing to get right due to all the mythology etc but it came across very well. Didn't overexplain anything, and kept it all fairly entertaining throughout. Some great acting and set-pieces.

Galvasean · 04-05-2011 11:04pm

Watched it again today, except this time in 3D. It made decent use of the 3D. It was no Avatar, but some of the scenes are helped considerbly. However, there is still the 3D glasses associated darkness to contend with which is annoying. So overall, I probably wouldn't recommend seeing it in 3D purely on the basis ofteh extra cost. However, if you cn see it with 3D at no extra cost (in some wonderful cinema I am not currently aware of) it is worth the payoff.

The film stands up very well on the second viewing. Acton scenes are still exciting and the humouris still funny. Perfect 1st date movie :cool:

Ghall · 04-05-2011 11:06pm

Loved this movie!

Drumpot · 05-05-2011 4:36am

3d or not ?

I havent seen the movie yet, but I know its the kind of Sh*t I would enjoy. So far, any 3d movie Ive watched hasnt "wowed" me.

Is the movie any good ?

If you dont give two Sh*ts about 3d, does it make much of a differance with or without 3d ?

Otacon · 05-05-2011 11:23am

None. I have seen it in both and if anything, the 3D is distracting. It gets to the point where you are almost looking out for the '3D shot'.

Save some money and see it in 2D.

Galvasean · 05-05-2011 12:38pm

Drumpot wrote: »

3d or not ?

I havent seen the movie yet, but I know its the kind of Sh*t I would enjoy. So far, any 3d movie Ive watched hasnt "wowed" me.

Is the movie any good ?

If you dont give two Sh*ts about 3d, does it make much of a differance with or without 3d ?

IMO

Galvasean wrote: »

It made decent use of the 3D. It was no Avatar, but some of the scenes are helped considerbly. However, there is still the 3D glasses associated darkness to contend with which is annoying. So overall, I probably wouldn't recommend seeing it in 3D purely on the basis ofteh extra cost. However, if you cn see it with 3D at no extra cost (in some wonderful cinema I am not currently aware of) it is worth the payoff.

Duggy747 · 05-05-2011 2:13pm

Watched it last night, found it to be better than I expected but was a bit too heavy on the cheese in some parts. The romance was a bit weak,

Natalie Portman getting wet for Thor as he described all the answers she had being looking for and then being devestated when he left. She was fairly devestated over a guy she only knew for about 2-3 days

:pac:

The 1960's Batman camera angles were a bit off from the rest of the movie but that's a tiny gripe from an otherwise failry decent flick. Some of the action set pieces were well done (though the CGI looked really ropey in some parts)

Although, I found it hard to forget I was watching Kim from Home & Away as Thor :pac:

Ridley · 07-05-2011 2:16am

Second attempt at this as my connection asploded on the first try.

Not a bad movie, don't think it was a great one either but a pleasant enough experience that was far better than what the previews made it out as. Felt like there were portions of the film missing when you're expected to empathise

with Thor and Foster being seperated from each other like it was some great tragedy when they barely know each other,

and

Odinsleep

not being explained.

Very happy with the portrayal of

Loki

. Much deeper than I would have expected although at the time

that line about Loki always being jealous of Thor was said, it didn't really ring true. Trickster god or not, I know more about Loki (of the film) than I do about Sif to be convinced.

It may be cheesy as Helheim at times but it's satisfying to have a superhero movie presented in a different way. In this case, like a theatre production. While reflecting what I know of the comics, and obviously more palatable when Thor plays with Iron Man and Captain America later on,

I'd rather the deity aspect wasn't as downplayed, as it seemed to be trying to avoid annoying theist members of the audience. Silly tippy-toeing when Thor is basically brought back from death as a reward for his sacrifice. Magic is science is fine for the movie but I like the layered Marvel Universe where pantheons coexist with magic and science.

Galvasean · 08-05-2011 5:59pm

Ridley wrote: »

. While reflecting what I know of the comics, and obviously more palatable when Thor plays with Iron Man and Captain America later on,
I'd rather the deity aspect wasn't as downplayed, as it seemed to be trying to avoid annoying theist members of the audience. Silly tippy-toeing when Thor is basically brought back from death as a reward for his sacrifice. Magic is science is fine for the movie but I like the layered Marvel Universe where pantheons coexist with magic and science.

I don't know much about the Thor comics, but I think the film choosing to portray the Norse Gods as aliens of sorts worked. Gods can be tricky things to adapt to film (see the Clash of the Titans remake for a botched attempt). The Asgardians in the Thor film were fantastical but believable (in terms of suspension of disbelief) IMO.

Mickeroo · 08-05-2011 7:45pm

Galvasean wrote: »

I don't know much about the Thor comics, but I think the film choosing to portray the Norse Gods as aliens of sorts worked. Gods can be tricky things to adapt to film (see the Clash of the Titans remake for a botched attempt). The Asgardians in the Thor film were fantastical but believable (in terms of suspension of disbelief) IMO.

It always made me wonder why everyone in the Marvel Universe doesn't just worship the norse gods, because if they are indeed gods well it's obviously the right religion then?!?! :P

Ridley · 08-05-2011 8:02pm

Galvasean wrote: »

I don't know much about the Thor comics, but I think the film choosing to portray the Norse Gods as aliens of sorts worked. Gods can be tricky things to adapt to film (see the Clash of the Titans remake for a botched attempt). The Asgardians in the Thor film were fantastical but believable (in terms of suspension of disbelief) IMO.

It's the of sorts that's bit awkward. I think it's easier to get a free pass on outlandish elements with "gods work in mysterious ways" over "it's a kind of magic" but I'd say Thor was trying to have it both ways at times. They're gods, but they're not god gods

I enjoyed Clash too despite it's horrible message that you're a pawn in a larger game and it's a waste of time trying to do anything about it.

Wish someone would do a movie adaptation of The Last Hero. Correct amount of seriousness to the whole business.

Mickeroo wrote: »

It always made me wonder why everyone in the Marvel Universe doesn't just worship the norse gods, because if they are indeed gods well it's obviously the right religion then?!?!

The Olympians are pseudo-gods aswell. And the Heliopolitans apparently.

Mickeroo · 08-05-2011 8:04pm

Ridley wrote: »

The Olympians are pseudo-gods aswell.

Oh yeah, forgot about that. Warring factions then?

unreggd · 09-05-2011 1:04am

Just saw Thor in 3D tonight

I thought it was sh;t

It was like a rom-com

Galvasean · 09-05-2011 1:12am

Saw it for the 3rd time today. Still very much enjoyed it.

Thor

Comments