Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry, I meant everything following that opening battle. (Btw, the font for the title was sweetly Kirby-esque. On a visual/design level, the movie's nigh-flawless.)
The movie's vague about Thor's activities in the interim since TDW. Even Sif is completely glossed over, apparently being "away" on some mission. To me, that's nonsense. Once Hela's reign of terror was underway, somebody, somehow, would have gotten through to her. (But then she'd be dead, too.)
Faux-Odin was so silly compared to the real thing, it seems one phrase could given Loki away. He was careless enough after Thor showed up with Surtur's skull. (I don't think it was the grapes.)
Spoiler
I was just watching a video about how one of the designers said that they purposefully gave the movie and the costumes a Kirby-esques look, even though I can't find the video. However, there are a lot of articles and videos on the internet that discuss how this movie was a tribute to Jack Kirby.
Also, as far as the whereabout of Lady Sif is concerned... don't be silly, AFtrEFkt. She's on Earth being an FBI agent with tattoos all over her body.
I was just watching a video about how one of the designers said that they purposefully gave the movie and the costumes a Kirby-esques look, even though I can't find the video. However, there are a lot of articles and videos on the internet that discuss how this movie was a tribute to Jack Kirby.
As we’ve seen from the trailers, stills and character design, director Taika Waititi’s film owes much to Kirby, not only in its use of characters he co-created — Thor and the Incredible Hulk most notably — but in the aesthetic. Flourishes of the signature “Kirby tech” can be seen in the designs of the Grandmaster’s palace and arena, and in the designs of aliens and costumes. The new logo is very much in line with something Kirby might’ve created.
Also, Kirby would have been 100 on August 28, 2017.
Since they stayed galactic with Thor before repeat views we only know sometimes after Age of Ultron for the actual timelines. We have seen Lady Sif on independent missions during that period on other MCU, it is all connected, broadcast.
So it is an easy head canon she was away when Hela struck and now is a homeless Asgardian cut off from the refugee ship.
I was just watching a video about how one of the designers said that they purposefully gave the movie and the costumes a Kirby-esques look, even though I can't find the video. However, there are a lot of articles and videos on the internet that discuss how this movie was a tribute to Jack Kirby.
Also, as far as the whereabout of Lady Sif is concerned... don't be silly, AFtrEFkt. She's on Earth being an FBI agent with tattoos all over her body.
Since they stayed galactic with Thor before repeat views we only know sometimes after Age of Ultron for the actual timelines. We have seen Lady Sif on independent missions during that period on other MCU, it is all connected, broadcast.
So it is an easy head canon she was away when Hela struck and now is a homeless Asgardian cut off from the refugee ship.
Yeah just like guardians 2 being in the phase two timeline. Who knows but it is sometime after Doctor Strange so it is clearly phase 3 events.
Haha, yeah, we all know of Jaime's commitment to Blindspot. I'm sure it pays better than her unimpressive (after the first Thor) role as Sif.
So how did Thor fly the Quinjet to Sakaar? Still waiting for someone to explain that one.
And dude, don't even try to argue Benedict's deadpan shtick. He was wooden. Very wooden. Mahogany.
Spoiler
And Sif's few guest appearances on AoS.
Also, Thor didn't fly the Quinjet to Sakaar, the Hulk did. But maybe this will help:
Quote:
This was the subject of a retcon after it became apparent that Ragnarok needed a big name supporting actor alongside Hemsworth. In short, the Hulk actually flew into space (at the end of Age of Ultron) where, after drifting for a while, he presumably chanced upon a portal to Sakaar or was picked up by a passing ship.
It all went down in the end of 2015’s Avengers: Age of Ultron, where the Hulk hated being a danger to everyone. So the climax of his arc in Age of Ultron was ignoring Natasha and allowing the Quinjet to keep flying. Since even Marvel doesn’t care to over-explain it, the Quinjet somehow lands on Sakaar, leaving the Hulk to become a warrior-slave for the Grandmaster (Jeff Goldblum).
I thought that was Sam Neill who played Odin in the 'Loki' play on Asgard. And I thought that the person who played Loki in the play looked familiar, but I'm just now finding out that it was Matt Damon. And real-life brother of Chris Hemsworth(not Liam) played Thor in the 'Loki' play.
Also, as far as Benedict goes... leave Diana Ross out of this.
*groan*
Spoiler
Yes, I meant Hulk flying it, not Thor. I need more coffee.
Still, the probability of all three ending up on Sakaar is far-fetched. They should have made it so that Loki ended up there by accident, but Thor was abducted by Valkyrie.
Overall I liked the movie. But it was weak in many ways. The three things that "bothered" me most about the movie were:
Spoiler
Thor made such a big deal about having his hair cut and then afterward, it was no big deal and made no difference to the story. Was it just a chance to get Stan Lee to do something other than walk by?
Also, why did they bother to rip out one of his eyes. While it was happening, he barely seemed to notice, and again, like the hair, after the blinding, Thor didn't even seem to notice or care.
In fact, Thor seemed to care more about having his hair cut than getting his eye destroyed.
And what was the point of the two assault weapons. The Marvel world is full of powerful and even exotic and even mystical weapons yet they made a big deal over two guns? Guns that are about half a man's hight yet secreted on Karl Urban's body During that whole fight on the Bifrost? Kinda lame.
Last edited by blktoptrvl; 11-10-2017 at 01:18 PM..
Overall I liked the movie. But it was weak in many ways. The three things that "bothered" me most about the movie were:
Spoiler
Thor made such a big deal about having his hair cut and then afterward, it was no big deal and made no difference to the story. Was it just a chance to get Stan Lee to do something other than walk by?
Also, why did they bother to rip out one of his eyes. While it was happening, he barely seemed to notice, and again, like the hair, after the blinding, Thor didn't even seem to notice or care.
In fact, Thor seemed to care more about having his hair cut than getting his eye destroyed.
And what was the point of the two assault weapons. The Marvel world is full of powerful and even exotic and even mystical weapons yet they made a big deal over two guns? Guns that are about half a man's hight yet secreted on Karl Urban's body During that whole fight on the Bifrost? Kinda lame.
1. It was the actor not the character who wanted the style. So it became the opportunity for a joke
2. A comic book artist made a big deal and thus following the source material we add the disability.
3. It is strange that Asgardians are nearly Superman unless one of their kind is holding the weapon
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
