Od's Blood! Hath ILE no thread for anticipation of Kenneth Branagh's THOR? Verily?

There's a book coming out (I forget what it's called) in a month oir so which features a short story about a werewolf with lots of hair and a deep voice who keeps getting mistaken in public for Brian Blessed.

I wonder if Branagh will read all 600 odd issues of Thor?

Does this guy have an actual career anywhere?:

Well, here's a sign that Thor could be really, really good: they fired Stuart Townsend from it. You'll remember that Townsend also got sacked from The Lord of the Rings trilogy, where he had actually played Aragorn for a couple of days of shooting. That fantasy film went on to be pretty darn good, so maybe Thor will be just as good.

The official story is that Townsend left over creative differences, but how different could his creative take be on one of the members of The Warriors Three, a truly tertiary group of Thor characters? Ain't It Cool says that Townsend got fired after arriving to a screen test late. SIX HOURS late. Yeah, that'll do it.

btw Brian Blessed appears to be playing neither Odin (Anthony Hopkins) nor Volstagg (Ray Stevenson). I don't know if I can deal with a Blessedless THOR ;_;

Serious director is serious:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0131100482ed970c-600wi

"It's going very, very well," Branagh said Wednesday. "We're in New Meixco now where we have a contemporary Earth part of our story. I guess we're two-thirds of the way through the story and at this stage of the game what's surprising and delighting me is the way the cast, the ensemble, has fused together. It's kind of an interesting combination of very young and very experienced people and the double-up of that, it seems to me, is there is a lot of fire in the movie. It doesn't take itself too seriously, it doesn't try to be too solemn."

Uh-huh.

And to answer Jel's question a while back:

"Growing up, my single comic book passion was Thor," says the 49-year-old actor and filmmaker who surprised many industry observers by taking on the director's job on the big-budget adaptation of the Marvel Comics thunder god. "From my time in Belfast as a kid, that's the first time I came across that comic, really, exclusively, I don't know why, but it struck a chord. I was drawn to it. I liked all the dynastic drama."

well that's encouraging I guess

not setting my hopes too high. Kirby-era Thor is some of my favorite stuff ever tho

oh, it's gonna be awesome, like transformers 2.

If there's Kirby-style Fafnir in this I will be so happy.

The passion. Or not. (I vote not.)

Hammertime

Dear me:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0134856c4cac970c-600wi

Branagh continues to burble:

On Saturday, July 24 , Marvel Studios has the final studio presentation in the expo's biggest room, Hall H, and "Thor" director Kenneth Branagh will use that climactic slot not just to introduce some of his cast -- a cast that includes Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman and Anthony Hopkins, but its unlikely that all three will be in San Diego -- but also to persuade skeptical fans that 3-D will add new dimensions to the 2011 blockbuster, and not just in the obvious way.

"We came to feel that in our case 3-D could be the very good friend of story and character for a different kind of experience," Branagh said, taking a break from post-production. The filmmaker said the terminology of the 3-D process initially made him cringe -- at first, it was "math and physics and way over my head," he said with a chuckle -- but then he started to pulse with the unexpected artistic opportunities.

"It's another draft of the story that can reveal itself in a different way," he said. "I had a healthy degree of skepticism up front ... I've become somebody extremely excited about working with possibilities of doing it this way."

not diggin the look

Is the picture meant to be hilarious?

It's Branagh, who the hell knows.

That looks more like Star Trek than Thor, pretty awful!

Who's the big bad in this movie? Are they gonna do Surtur, or just Loki?

I know someone who is playing "Pet Store Clerk" in this film. They did a big open casting for extra's here too (NM).

Pet Store Clerk is def Thor's most fearsome antagonist.

what the (re: the pic)

Do you not appreciate his mighty hammer there?

grey is not a good color scheme for Thor

would assume they're just doing Loki (that's him on the right, yeah?) Surtur would be kinda ridiculous/too obscure

Yup, that is Loki. Hurrah sidelong glances.

I can't tell if they are about to make out or if they're both checking out Odin's ass

"They call him One-Eye."

was Thor's winged helmet deemed too gay or waht

this looks like it's based on Marvel Ultimate Thor rather than classic Marvel 616 Thor

god why do I know these things

xp He doesn't wear it inside!

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3554/3615798499_551b6b3766.jpg

I see Hulk Hogan is back on the steroids.

really missed a trick not casting Kevin McKidd

why does that statue of Thor include Capt America's shield...?

Ultimate Thor is this dude who may be the son of Odin and may actually be completely insane. IIRC, at one point he beats up both Iron Man and Captain America.

for some reason i'd got the idea idris elba was playing thor

"We came to feel that in our case 3-D could be the very good friend of story and character for a different kind of experience,which way the wind was blowing," Branagh said, taking a break from post-production.

I wouldn't say Surtur is "too obscure", he's the main villain in the best known Thor story arc there is. He isn't any more obscure than Dr. Octopus or whoever the villains in the the two Iron Man movies were.

I'd say Enchantress would make a lot more sense

I wouldn't say Surtur is "too obscure", he's the main villain in the best known Thor story arc there is

lol Tuomas - anybody who's never read a Thor comic has no idea who Surtur is. Loki is at least a more commonly known mythological figure and also traditional Thor's arch nemesis.

In related news, the new Incredible Hulk to be...

http://www.deadline.com/2010/07/mark-ruffalo-in-late-stage-talks-to-be-marvels-new-hulk-in-the-avengers/

haha waht

I thought he was dead

I wouldn't say Surtur is "too obscure", he's the main villain in the best known Thor story arc there is

lol Tuomas - anybody who's never read a Thor comic has no idea who Surtur is.

Well yeah, but the same applied to almost all superhero villains (except maybe The Joker and Lex Luthor) before they appeared in movies.

And Loki is more than just "traditional Thor's arch nemesis". He's the trickster god, in Norse mythology he sometimes sides with the Æsir, and sometimes goes against them. Marvel changed him into a more pure villain, though I liked how Simonson handled him in the Surtur saga: we see him both scheming against Thor and taking his side in the battle with Surtur. IMO that's much more in line with the traditional depiction of Loki.

Well yeah, but the same applied to almost all superhero villains

most of Spiderman's rouge's gallery has appeared in every Saturday morning cartoon about him; you could actually argue because of this that, while Green Goblin is his traditional nemesis from a storyline standpoint, Doctor Octopus is the villain most people would associate with him

lolwut

maybe if it was an inverse-Hulk, where some huge dude got hit by radiation and now whenever he gets angry, he becomes really skinny and frail

oh man plz plz plz give it to the Ruff

hough I liked how Simonson handled him in the Surtur saga: we see him both scheming against Thor and taking his side in the battle with Surtur. IMO that's much more in line with the traditional depiction of Loki.

this is more in line with Kirby's depiction actually

I am seriously struggling to avoid actual LOLs here:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef013485894ab0970c-600wi

Here's a first-look image of the majestic throne of Odin (Anthony Hopkins) in the city of Asgard, where Thor (Chris Hemsworth) kneels before his father in the 2011 film from Disney's Marvel Studios and Paramount Pictures.

...

I talked to "Thor" director Kenneth Branagh not long ago and he was genuinely excited about his first trip to Comic-Con and the chance to stand up into front of the Hall H audience as part of the Marvel program. "Because of what I've heard, I can't wait... the celebration and the incredible energy and enthusiasm and knowledge and passion for everything that goes on there. I'm excited to be part of that and I feel privileged to be able to go and take look. I'm keen to see that passion and enthusiasm."

With tongue-in-cheek -- at least I think it was tongue-in-cheek -- Feige said he might hit the stage with a sartorial nod to the Con's cosplay traditions. "I'm looking forward to seeing how people are dressed... Kevin and I are not prepared to reveal what costume we'll be wearing but obviously I've insisted that we all must wear one."

Help.

Anyway, nice to know that Asgard can be found on the Strip near the Bellagio.

color scheme is all wrong

Also, great shoulder pads there.

otm

I only saw it one time, as with I think all these Marvel movies, but I thought the second Thor movie was pretty good, and pretty funny.

one thing i want to add is that over the end credits there's the most terrible generic alt-rock song and i had to find out who performed it so I could hate them, and it was the Foo Fighters. They are really that bad.

Since it doesn't have its own thread, I want to also say I mostly liked the 2008 Hulk film, a solid 6/10 movie with a nice amount of pacing and a very wise decision to begin the film in medias res (probably because we'd already had Ang Lee/Eric Bana Hulk a few years before.) The stakes were extremely low and I can't decide whether or not it was a good narrative decision. Not much happened in the film and I'd have bought the Tim Roth role more if he wasn't just a random amoral black-ops soldier type. That said, I liked him.

I couldn't stop looking at William Hurt's mustache though, I think it was stolen from the set of Gettysburg.

been watching these movies since i liked wandavision and loki

this one was dire

It's pretty dull. They hadn't quite figured everything out yet, with Thor himself the biggest oversight. The Dark World might not be anyone's fave, but at least he'd moved beyond Space Tarzan.

Ragnarok is top two marvel efforts tho

Exactly. If it took Thor one to get to Thor 3, it was all worth it. There are definitely sequels better than the original, but how often is the third one significantly better than both of them?

Besides Godfather 3 and Jaws 3, of course.

Significantly is prob tbh underselling it!

First two Thors are the only og core Avengers solo flix I don't rate very highly (I even prefer Iron Man 2, and yes I know that everyone thinks I'm an idiot on that count and likely many other counts).

Iron Man 2 suuuuuuucks. It might be the only MCU movie that is outright bad, imo. Looks bad, written bad, over stuffed and under stuffed.

xpost Well, like, a lot of people like Toy Story 3 a lot and think it's the best. I personally don't, but even so, no sane person that would call it significantly better than Toy Story 3. So Thor 3 is not just better, it's *significantly*, dramatically better than the other two.

(And yes, I even rate Norton Hulk higher, bring it bruh.)

Obviously the presence of Hemsworth and Hiddleston elevates the material considerably but they're pretty saggy affairs otherwise.

Iron man 2 is certainly better than thor 1

Iron man 2 may be better than the two endgames and black panther tbh

Oof. When my kid and I rewatched them all over the last year Iron Man 2 was the only one we kind of looked at each other after and agreed, well, that was pretty shitty. I want to say I liked Thor more the second time. And Dark World remained fine to me.

Dr strange woeful

Anyways, thor 1 no good, back on topic

Dr. Strange, like Thor, often felt like it had just a couple of sets and tried to make those two sets look like lots of sets, but I wasn't fooled.

Didn’t like Thor 1 the first time I watched it but it really grew on me after the second viewing - it’s kinda lovably goofy. And I’ve said it before but so glad they cast Chris and not Liam Hemsworth as Thor.

Thor 2 is forgettable, Iron Man 2 is outright bad - those two, along with Dr Strange and Avengers: Age of Ultron, are solidly bottom tier MCU.

I feel like this is a fair compromise position from which to bring in the endgames and black panther and i look fwd to the next round of talks

i've only seen the first four, to which i say

iron man 1 >>>>>>>>>>>> iron man 2 > hulk >>>>>>>>>>>> thor 1

probably only because of downey tho. and paltrow is the best of the ladies so far

idris elba is the only good part of thor (although hemsworth is indeed quite a physical specimen)

I don't even remember the baddy in Iron Man 2. I know it's sometimes Mickey Rourke, but other than him, there's some other shit going on that I just totally blank on. Which is crazy for a film with soooooo much going on (literally; the movie otherwise has nothing going on).

Mockey rourke and sam rockwell put it well out of the mire tbh

Now that's as entertainment, if there are metrics under which those guys' performances actually bring what is held to be a decent movie down then they are imo nonsense metrics because nothing in that movie besides is worth a look

I believe tombot had views as to the pinpoint accuracy of Sam Rockwell's performance as an non-military contractor pitching for military contracts. I don't have any views on that, I don't have access to that metric and I don't feel that I should have. It might be "a good civil servant's film" is what I'm saying.

Dr. Strange, like Thor, often felt like it had just a couple of sets and tried to make those two sets look like lots of sets, but I wasn't fooled.

― Josh in Chicago, Sunday, July 18, 2021 2:44 PM (five hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

this always stuck out to me about thor 1, the scenes that took place on earth looked incredibly cheap. like they were filmed on a theme park wild west shootout show set

Thor 1 was great

I love the first Thor. To me it is a very well-working mix between sword-and-sorcery fantasy & contemporary MCU real-world stuff. I find Loki done particularly well, I also think the Warriors Three and Lady Sif are nicely distinguished enriching extras.

I remember hoping to love the second Thor as much but coming out of the cinema quite disappointed. However, when I rewatched it later, I enjoyed it immensely.

I personally don't think any of the MCU movies has been below average-to-good. My least favourite has always been Iron Man II as well, but I thought it was enjoyable enough. It has been a while since the last time I watched it, I wonder if I like it better now as with The Dark World.

I personally don't think any of the MCU movies has been below average-to-good.

Thor 2 had the business with the portals at the end, which was quite fun for an MCU boss battle

otherwise pretty worthless iirc

Except that Thor himself is more fun, too, and Darcy is a funny character as well.

ragnarok used hemsworth so perfectly that it made you wonder why it took so long for the creative team to realize that thor should be a total goofball. ragnarok and infinity war did a good job of indulging in that side of him while also remembering why he's a noble hammer-wielding hero. endgame went a little too far in the goofy direction, imo, tho who wouldn't want to sit around and play video games all day with korg.