Thor: Ragnarok

Out of the heroes introduced during Phase 1 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the two with the worst utilization of character and films are Thor and Hulk. The former is a God of Thunder from one of the 9 realms, Asgaard, who wields his mighty hammer Mjolnir but it's been difficult to care much about him when his solo movies have been among the weaker entries in the MCU and his archetype has been downgraded from noble warrior to standard comic relief in team-ups, though Chris Hemsworth makes the role watchable. The latter is an intelligent physicist with a Jekyll-Hyde complex when his anger transforms him into an incredibly large powerhouse, however, after his MCU debut film failed and that actor (Edward Norton) was uncooperative with the studio, he was recast to Mark Ruffalo, who was great in the role in The Avengers, even though the writers didn't seem to know what to do with him from there. Guardians of the Galaxy's surprise success inspired Marvel to copy its stylistic formula to produce comedically similar projects to this day, which brings us to their new effort to reboot our mismanaged heroes. The marketing for Thor: Ragnarok drove massive hype since it embraced the 1980s style from Guardians for another adventure in the cosmos. I entered the auditorium ready to see how this would hold up on its own and left it craving not only the first Thor film but also the upcoming Justice League after the fun but frustrating experience.

Notes: For more insight into Thor/Hulk films and their usage in the Avengers, please look at the Marvel Retrospective page. As usual, the spoiler parts of this review will be added to that page after it's out of the movie theaters. Keep in mind that according to the director, Taika Waititi, 80% of the dialog was improvised by the actors. So issues that will be discussed here can be partly attributed to that reason.

Plot: Taking place two year after the Age of Ultron, the story follows our titular lead facing off against estranged sister (after a chain of events) who sends him far away from his home and he ventures to get back home in an effort to prevent the apocalypse she brings with her vast power. It's essentially a road trip comedy that finds our main protagonist dealing with wacky situations that don't take themselves seriously, basically repeating the same narrative structure from the first Thor. The tones presented here often clashes against each other with the nature of the humor overwhelming the serious nature of the impending apocalypse from the villain. This presents the main problem of preferring to hammer in jokes over the potential substance presented with each person and plot points instead of living up to the scope with environment and worthy investment in the heroes/villains, which is reflecting in half of the main characters (and yes hammer pun intended). As a result, the lore loses its capabilities of finding the depth needed to care for the magnitude of the conflict at hand. All that being said, however, there is some solid entertainment value in the good humorous moments (out of the numerous amount of failed/forced ones) along with some nice interaction. Since this is combination of the Ragnarok and Planet Hulk comic book stories, it contained a pattern of briefly talking about certain arcs before doing something else (kind of forgetting about what was being said earlier), which would have been better remedied if this was split into two films to add more depth to both storylines and people. Overall Thor Ragnaroks narrative structure runs with pieces of comic book arcs into one package that briefly introduces something before hurrying back hammer in more gags and one-liners for the entertainment value.

Characters: The individuals to focus on are Thor (Chris Hemsworth), Hela (Cate Blanchett), and  Hulk (Mark Ruffalo). Thor is one of the leads afflicted by the aforementioned issue as he moves through each act mostly with one liners and quips while occasionally giving some moments of introspect about his family issues. Chris makes the role entertaining to watch, despite rebooting his personality for even more predictable jokes. Hela is the goddess of death and Thor's devious, powerful sister with malevolent plans of conquest. Honestly she deserved more screen time with the danger she presents to our heroes since she isn't around that much, which is a shame as her story is rather fascinating with Cate bringing a great portrayal as well as looking visually stunning.

The Hulk is another lead suffering from the aforementioned problem but nowhere near how Thor is affected since it starts an interesting arc for himself. Mark does a good job reacting with his environment and interacting with Thor while dealing with his complex relationship Jekyll-Hyde (albeit briefly touching on it). Honorable mentions go to Loki (Tom Hiddleston) and Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson) for the formers charm and quick-wit with his brother while being predictable with his intentions (along with Tom finding a better movie than Kong Skull Island) while the latter lands a strong first impression out of the cast (alongside the villainess) with her attitude and background providing her solid development (in addition to drinking her troubles away to cope with being in a Thor movie). A special honorable mention goes to Grandmaster (Jeff Goldblum) for not caring about whatever media he's in and just being weird in the right ways (basically being himself). Overall the protagonists and actors deserved better movies since this could have been split into two movies (one for Thor and one for Hulk) Thor: Ragnarok's trying to tell instead of piling everything together and letting the humor degrade any potential growth interest for them (particularly Hela and Valkyrie).

Action: The action can get pretty tiresome in some aspects when its pretty easy for the combatant and the camera is shot from a distance at time instead of being more up close, notably the opening fight scene. As a result it doesn't feel as impactful with every hit, though it does improve from there in terms of variety and locations. However, it should be noted that this is one of the more violent MCU films where they display a lot of killing on-screen, particularly the fight scenes involving Hela, who is pretty overpowered and has a Game of Thrones feeling when she demands opposing forces to "bend the knee" kneel. That level of harm even scars a someone to the point where it lingers on it for some odd reason (keep in mind that since it's a PG-13 movie it doesn't show bleeding and I'm sure families won't mind having their kids see this level of violence). A special mention goes to an awesome arena fight between Thor and Hulk that manages to surpass the Hulkbuster fight from Age of Ultron where it carries the fun charisma of the rivalry between both combatants and delivers the desired experience fans have been waiting for, despite the fact it loses its surprise factor due it being a main point of the marketing. Overall the action takes time to find its rhythm in the second half due to camera perspectives, though the level of violence is higher than its predecessors.

Visuals: For all of the previously mentioned problems, one of the best elements displayed here is the design of the planet Sakaar and a few moments. It's a garbage planet abundant of bounty hunters and garbage sent from planets via wormholes with colorful buildings spread throughout the world. It feels like a colorful stereotypical version of futuristic cities where aliens and humans from other planets just go to kickback and relax from their troubles, which helps the part of the wacky tone succeed with. Honorable mentions go to the Valkyrie flashback scene and escape ship sequence where the former allows the dark design of Hela clashing the heavenly glow of the attacking army in great slow motion while the latter shows some good background shots as our group of misfits fight their way out of their predicament.

Overall Consensus: Thor: Ragnarok is a fun but frustrating experience via its style over substance approach with solid interactions, good visuals, and nice action moments, even though its comical aspect ruins emotional development and stakes for the characters and plot. ⭑⭑⭑💻

Marvel Comedy Fatigue: While the nature of these movies are family friendly with usually light hearted tones, the usage of gags/quips can be nice at times to bring levity in harsh situations and doesn't compromise the tension of the conflict. The Guardians of the Galaxy approach worked for its own series because it managed to balance out the funny laughs with developing its own misfits. However, just because Marvel is copying that style for its recent and upcoming entries, that doesn't imply it will guarantee anything if its only remembered for entertainment over the risks of the threats the protagonists will encounter. Similar to Spider-Man: Homecoming, the conclusion here is reminiscent of it via its mismanagement of the priorities to effectively present something worth caring about. If this is the new standard that's going to affect other newcomers to the plate, then why is the theater experience needed if we are getting the same thing over and over such as we did this past year (though even Guardians Vol 2 was still effective in its own right)? While each director is unique in their approach, there's that aforementioned case here where it will come to affect those larger entries (I'm confident it's going to affect the Infinity War most and feel sorry for Thanos at this point but hopefully I'm wrong).

Reasons to watch it: You like any of the aforementioned actors. You like MCU entries preferred humor over building the scope and evolution for their lead individuals/conflict. You enjoy good buddy road trips with hilarious hi-jinx. You don't mind a sexual reference joke being used (this one goes farther than Spider-Man Homecomings porn joke). You like Thor and/or Hulk. You are excited to see the Thor and Hulk arena fight. You don't mind pretty violent comic book films. You enjoy hearing Led Zeppelin's Immigrant Song. You are curious about its effect on the MCU. You like comic book movies with solid lead interactions and nice looking visuals.

Reasons to avoid it: You dislike any of the aforementioned actors. You are annoyed by comic book movies that try too many things instead of spacing them out enough for more of an impact. You dislike MCU entries preferred humor and emotionless deaths over building the scope and evolution for their lead individuals/conflict. You are annoyed by good buddy road trips with hilarious hi-jinx. You mind a sexual reference joke being used (this one goes farther than Spider-Man Homecomings porn joke). You don't like the Thor movies. You dislike Thor and/or Hulk. You don't care the Thor and Hulk arena fight. You mind pretty violent comic book films (keep in mind that it doesn't really show any blood or gore). You are sensitive to lackluster comic book movies that use the same narrative structure of its predecessors.

Coming up next: Niche November has begun with mixed results as Thor: Ragnarok may have pleased critics and audiences with its entertainment and style over substance approach but it missed in mark yet again as the MCU faltered itself in introducing story pieces but inefficiently following through on them. Instead of rising above its own standard, Marvel stepped back into it as it played things safer for itself, which isn't surprising for their box office. Before we move onto the next blockbuster entry of the month (that'll be tonally different from this one), there's going to be a small detour as Screening Spectacles will take a look at an independent film to see if it's worth the critical praise or not, The Florida Project!