Originally posted by Stealth Moose
The only thing I didn't care for was the stinger. Everything else was pretty awesome.
There was no historical development of the Dark Elves, there was no character development of Malekith, everything that happens just seems so rushed. For that movie to have been successful, they needed to either split it into two parts, or add an extra hour. It wasn't nearly as good as the first Thor and it could have been. No, I didn't care for the stinger either because it ruined the "sacrifice" but at the same time, he is the best damn actor in that franchise by a mile and that includes Anthony Hopkins.
Originally posted by psmith81992
There was no historical development of the Dark Elves, there was no character development of Malekith, everything that happens just seems so rushed. For that movie to have been successful, they needed to either split it into two parts, or add an extra hour. It wasn't nearly as good as the first Thor and it could have been. No, I didn't care for the stinger either because it ruined the "sacrifice" but at the same time, he is the best damn actor in that franchise by a mile and that includes Anthony Hopkins.
1. More time would have been nice sure.
2. Why do we need enemy characterization for the dark elves? We see that they are primordial beings with blue and organe morality scales, seeking to plunge the galaxy into the darkness from which it came. Simple enough. Did you require a svartalalf primer?
3. Malekith was a pretty good villain in the sense that he was dangerous, he had control over the engagement nine times out of ten, and he nearly defeated everyone. His lieutenant and elite mook was arguably more dangerous, but overall I liked what I saw.
4. You're joking about Benicio or Hiddleston? The stinger is post_credits.
2. Why do we need enemy characterization for the dark elves? We see that they are primordial beings with blue and organe morality scales, seeking to plunge the galaxy into the darkness from which it came. Simple enough. Did you require a svartalalf primer?
3. Malekith was a pretty good villain in the sense that he was dangerous, he had control over the engagement nine times out of ten, and he nearly defeated everyone. His lieutenant and elite mook was arguably more dangerous, but overall I liked what I saw.
4. You're joking about Benicio or Hiddleston? The stinger is post_credits.
Spoiler:
I don't want Hiddleston's character to bow out but they committed to precisely that when they killed him initially.
Originally posted by psmith81992
No, but I require more of a backstory regarding their wars with the Asgardians. Anything better than "oh look they're alive again, oh look they're invading Asgard".
What part of "primordial darkness people who hate people of light" failed to satisfy you? Should they write a drama on why jotuns hate earthlings and Asgardians too?
Wait, you didn't care about that in the film. Why is this such a nitpick? Hell, the Chitauri got less characterization, practically being Space Fleas from Nowhere, and everyone creamed their panties over the Avengers.
He was a decent villain through no fault of his own. They really needed to develop him better.
Malekith is a figurehead of a people who are a combination of "The Horde" and a "Force of Nature". His motivations are clear, his lack of empathy apparent, and his methodology is pretty cut and dry.
Spoiler:
The fact that he has been in stasis for thousands of years and then undoes Asgard's defenses entirely in less than an hour's time says a lot about his power, intelligence, and willingness to get stuff done.
I thought he was fleshed out enough. His role against Thor isn't really personal; he hates all the children of "this world" and that's all we require.
Loki, I was not happy with that.Spoiler:
I don't want Hiddleston's character to bow out but they committed to precisely that when they killed him initially.
In terms of Benicio, it was cool but not all that surprising.
Spoiler:
Tom already indicated he won't be in the next Thor film. So we won't likely know about what happened to Odin and why he's occupying the throne until Avengers 2. I like Loki a lot, but I don't have this hype that everyone else has, so I took his presence as a bonus, not a mandatory part of enjoyment. For me, they work great together, but you could do a movie without one or the other and it'd still be great.I also thought the stinger looked really low-quality, like a costume party filmed on someone's handheld just to cram in a plot hook. It was the only part of the film I didn't like.
What part of "primordial darkness people who hate people of light" failed to satisfy you? Should they write a drama on why jotuns hate earthlings and Asgardians too?Wait, you didn't care about that in the film. Why is this such a nitpick? Hell, the Chitauri got less characterization, practically being Space Fleas from Nowhere, and everyone creamed their panties over the Avengers.
Malekith is a figurehead of a people who are a combination of "The Horde" and a "Force of Nature". His motivations are clear, his lack of empathy apparent, and his methodology is pretty cut and dry.
Spoiler:
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: Tom already indicated he won't be in the next Thor film. So we won't likely know about what happened to Odin and why he's occupying the throne until Avengers 2. I like Loki a lot, but I don't have this hype that everyone else has, so I took his presence as a bonus, not a mandatory part of enjoyment. For me, they work great together, but you could do a movie without one or the other and it'd still be great.