Thor: The Dark World

I liked the first Thor better, mainly because there were no moments to smile about, but rather regular jokes and gags. There are only a few of these in the sequel, and they're really good... But there aren't enough of them. I'm actually not very clear on what kind of movie this was supposed to be. The "dark" subtitle suggests a kind of fateful spectacle with a more serious note, but what a surprise - the "funny one" was also much more serious! Or did Kenneth Branagh just make it seem that way? Aha! I think I've hit the nail on the head (whilst wielding Mjolnir)! Well, fortunately, none of this means that Thor: The Dark World was bad or that it wasn’t entertaining. It's imaginative and brisk entertainment, it doesn't offend and there's little that doesn't need to be there (poor Stellan Skarsgård got a good beating from the script). Even Loki's "improvement" didn't bother me that much (the moment when he reads a book in his cell undisturbed made me laugh out loud, just like Thor's ride on the subway). I decided to add a fourth star for the portal finale, which was really well thought out and unexpectedly playful. And, lest I forget, the great post-credit scene. (12/11/2013)

I struggled quite a bit with the first phase of the MCU, and the first Thor was one of the films that held me back the most. But strangely enough, The Dark World has grown on me, and the second phase of the MCU is becoming more bearable. Perhaps it is because there was nothing overly special to explain and we could get straight to the point. Natalie Portman's charms were also finally taken advantage of and the whole thing was a lot more fun. So if this is the final shape that all those origins and the first team-up had to suffer for, then fine. But it took five years. (14/05/2015)

This is the most desperate Marvel movie ever. Plenty of money, fancy special effects, kinetic cinematography, and dynamic editing drive forward an absolutely empty story, which wouldn't matter if Taylor could keep people under control. The first third of the film is a bore (the classic Marvel stuff, change the dramaturgist already), the second is also a bore (by Odin, didn't anyone tell these actors that their characters are supposed to be experiencing something?) and the final third sucks during every second. Although the finale in Greenwich is a nice change in scenery and the subway joke is divine (did the writers really not understand that Asgardian seriousness should be diluted?), if it weren't for Hiddleston enjoying every Loki second in the plot, I would have died from all the sterility. (14/07/2015)

He came, he saw, he was not surprised. Purely as an old acquaintance, I forgive the emotionally collapsed (rather inflated in terms of tone) first half, the Marvel exposition according to the "nothing from something" template is, of course, expected. Nevertheless, it seems to me that the scheme "from the dark depths of the universe will emerge another horse face that has another mega-weapon to destroy the cosmos" is starting to get quite worn out and hackneyed. The best thing about Thor: The Dark World is not the main storyline, but rather the completion of relational peripeteia from past films (Thor x Frigga, Thor x Loki, a comedy storyline with a disturbed Erik). It is shot skillfully, it tries to dilute the theatricality with dark fantasy and a greater richness of relationships between the gods. The result is not dazzling, but at least it works (and where it doesn’t, it ironically thematizes the discrepancy - jumps between dimensions). I was expecting some more surprises and a slightly fresh approach. But the series team hit the Marvel tracks and isn't tearing out the sleepers. In the end, it escalates nicely, Natalie is (more and more the same) fragile, Chris waves the hammer around decently... basically, things are essentially the same as always. Nothing amazing, nothing beneficial, no new interesting characters... a pleasant stop on the way to something bigger. Which I'm actually not really looking forward to. Thor: The Dark World confirmed to me that the only real life line in the Marvel world is Iron Man. If, instead of saving the world, he's worrying about what is going on inside his head. Otherwise, it's a wooden costumed opera that is nice to look at, but it doesn't really move anything forward. I liked the first film more, because everything was new and detailed. The second film just successfully draws from it. Edit: No, I cannot give it 4 stars compared to Iron Man 3... [65%] (05/11/2013)

If Iron Man 3 raised hopes that Marvel movies could at last escape being such predictable “run-of-the-mill, mass-produced, paint-by-numbers movies, inoffensive and targeted at everybody and so suitable for nobody in the end" and head out on their own path, the new Thor tramples this hope deep into the earth. None of it is downright bad, but nothing is downright good either; it’s simply an unambitious safe bet, like most of the previous movies of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It is only really good where it isn’t taking itself seriously. And moments like that are few and far between; Loki’s cameo conjuring, the coat hanger, the subway, the monster with the doves... And that’s about all. In the end we get about thirty seconds of real entertainment and all the rest is just make-believe? (08/11/2013)