Login
You can call me crazy all you want, but if there’s one franchise that’s more overrated and currently incredibly popular than the Marvel Cinematic Universe, I can’t think of it. And this is coming from someone who learned how to read and draw from his issues of X-Men. The beef I have with them, for those of you that don’t already know, is quite simple: by manufacturing all of these movies to tie together, eventually collide into one super-film, and function as spin-offs for new solo films makes for viewing that is frequently paint-by-numbers. It’s like watching everyone involved in the production try to do their jobs with one hand tied behind their back and trying to successfully complete a set of jumping jacks.
This not to say that any of the films have not been without merits, charms, or that a few of them haven’t been solidly constructed. Captain America: The First Avenger worked so well because it existed independently of all the others. All it had to do to tie into the rest of the franchise was make sure that Cap got frozen in ice at the very end. They didn’t even have to unthaw him, that was a bonus. Thor worked best when it ignored the mortal realm and had fun treating Asgard like a Shakespearean tragedy waiting to happen. Luckily Thor: The Dark World doesn’t descend into a cacophony of overly done sound effects, too many characters, unsatisfactory story strands and general poor filmmaking like Iron Man 2, but it doesn’t really do anything better than the first solo Thor film.
It was a smart move to put most of the action in Asgard and the other realms while generally staying away from Earth for as long as possible, but that doesn’t shake the “made by committee” feeling that permeates the entire thing. I think in the end though, that Thor: The Dark World emerges as better than average for this type of film, but it still doesn’t reach the artistic highs of X2: X-Men United, Superman: The Movie or The Dark Knight Trilogy.
Look, these films always have a certain amount of bloat that is to be expected and frequently the talented older cast members are given little to do and sent off on notes that are supposed to be highly emotional, but ring as hollow due to little time being used to develop their characters. The most obvious examples are Anthony Hopkins and Renee Russo as Odin and Frigga, the king and queen of Asgard and parents of Thor and Loki. You’d think with a character pedigree like that they’d play a larger role in the overall film, but not so. They’re firmly side-lined, given one glorious moment to showcase how badass they are before being either killed off or shoved to the sides to make more room for Kat Dennings and Jonathan Howard as Natalie Portman’s interns.
Call me crazy, but I’d sacrifice Portman, Dennings, Howard and Stellan Skarsgard to spend more time with the Asgardian characters. Or, you know, our new big bad Malekith (Christopher Eccleston). While Eccleston is perfectly cast in the role of the rulers of the dark elves, he’s also given little to do as the film tries to keep far too many plots successfully spinning in the air and praying none of them fall. At this point I’ve come to expect Sif and the Warriors Three to be given the short-end of the stick, but cutting down the main villain’s role seems inherently grievous a decision.
Nothing against Portman, I love her as an actor and I’m happy to see her character take a more proactive role, but I think the romance aspect of the Thor films is always the weakest link. We mostly see Sif mooing over him from afar, while Thor and Jane Foster interact more intimately. So this particular plot is fairly limp and generates no heat. Maybe they’ll finally do something interesting with it in the inevitable sequel – I’m hoping for an appearance by the Enchantress and Executioner myself to really give the romance some juice.
But thank god that Marvel, more specifically Kenneth Branagh, was smart enough to cast Tom Hiddleston as Loki. For my money, he’s the great MVP of this whole thing. He plays bad wonderfully, relishing every moment afforded him to chew the scenery or deliver a hilariously withering quip with great bite. He plays Loki like the long lost relative of Richard III, a character so charismatic and single-minded in his quest to become king that we can’t help but be entranced by his scheming and plotting. Hiddleston also manages to bring a fragile depth to this scheming trickster. But the sub-plot involving his relationship to Frigga is half-baked and never generates the amount of empathy or sympathy called for. This is not the fault of Russo or Hiddleston, as they try valiantly to create a bond that looks believable and almost succeed. I do take issue with a moment that does generate a tone of emotion, but then it’s nullified by the end. You’ll know it when you see it.
He also plays off Chris Hemsworth’s Thor beautifully. Hemsworth, I haven’t seen Rush but I’m convinced there’s a great actor underneath the hulking physique, plays the heroic straight man wonderfully. He doesn’t get a flashy role, but he does anchor the entire franchise with an appealing mixture of arrogant bravado, humor and strength. Plus a body that it truly Adonis-like in every conceivable form of that word.
So there you have it. Thor: The Dark World is a case of too much going on at once for any of it to truly matter in the end. It’s a low stakes affair, but it is a lot of fun. So that does account for a whole lot of something. It may not rank amongst the best and brightest of the superhero films, but it’s definitely a better-than-average piece of action-adventure popcorn entertainment. Now if only Marvel would get really daring and drop the symbiotic franchise building and character spin-offs and focus on just making a daring, original and adventurous adaptation of their work that allows a writer and director to spin the material in darker or more independent avenues.
