Thor: Love and Thunder (2022)

[starri]

The one thing I wanted more than anything else was for them to do justice to the Goddess of Thunder story, and given how jokey the trailers were, I was worried.  But they played that part straight, and I walked out of the theater perfectly satisfied.  Natalie Portman kicked ass this time.

[Jediknight]

5 hours ago, BaggythePanther said:

Thor seemed like a good leader this movie. He doesn’t always know the right thing to say but he takes charge and did a good job inspiring the kids.

I think he knew the right things to say to the kids.  While they were scared in the cage, he told them they were the bravest he's ever known.  And then when some pointed out they weren't Asgardian before the final, he made sure to reassure them.

1 minute ago, starri said:

The one thing I wanted more than anything else was for them to do justice to the Goddess of Thunder story, and given how jokey the trailers were, I was worried.  But they played that part straight, and I walked out of the theater perfectly satisfied.  Natalie Portman kicked ass this time.

I can understand why they went jokey with the trailer.  If they showed serious moments, that would give away what's gonna happen to Jane in the trailer.

[ICantDoThatDave]

I think what's happened to the MCU is that the jokes, the humor, used to be naturally integrated into the story.  Like, take Thor in Infinity War, when he meets the GotG: really watch that scene - he never makes a joke.  It's all Star Lord being insecure & his lines are funny, & Thor's responses to Star Lord are funny, yes, but... Thor never breaks character to make a joke.

But lately, in the more recent movies, like this one, they're like: "we have to insert a joke every X minutes".  It's gotten silly, with poor writing, where instead of "the story just fits in a joke naturally", it's more like "the story has to be done to accommodate a joke".

Edited July 10, 2022 by ICantDoThatDave

[Jediknight]

3 hours ago, ICantDoThatDave said:

I think what's happened to the MCU is that the jokes, the humor, used to be naturally integrated into the story.  Like, take Thor in Infinity War, when he meets the GotG: really watch that scene - he never makes a joke.  It's all Star Lord being insecure & his lines are funny, & Thor's responses to Star Lord are funny, yes, but... Thor never breaks character to make a joke.

But lately, in the more recent movies, like this one, they're like: "we have to insert a joke every X minutes".  It's gotten silly, with poor writing, where instead of "the story just fits in a joke naturally", it's more like "the story has to be done to accommodate a joke".

I think it works for Thor, because Thor uses his humor as a coping mechanism.  Like the conversation with Star Lord, where Star Lord told Thor to "feel shitty."  Thor never wanted to feel that, so he upped the jokes.  And while with the Guardians he had a crisis of self, he loved Jane and that was gone.  For the first time, he had to face that the woman he loved broke up with him.  Ragnarok happened right after their break up, so he didn't have time to work through everything before Odin dies, Hela came back, and Ragnarok happens.  And right after that, you saw Thanos murder half of the Asguardians, including his best friend in Heimdall, and his brother Loki.  He doesn't even have time to grieve that before he goes right after Thanos to kill him.  He wasn't able to stop the snap, and locked himself away in New Asgard, not caring what happened after.

But with the Guardians, Thor actually faced all of that head on, and he questioned his place in life.  He upped the jokes to deal with everything.  When told about Jane's cancer, he doesn't make a joke.  Thor also doesn't want to face losing Jane again, permanently.

Humor is a way for Thor to cope with everything.  A big thing in Phase 4 so far has been grief, and how people process it.  Also, they realized that Hemsworth is a comedic genius, and they've gotta take advantage of that.

[scarynikki12]

“He’s here! He’s there! He’s every-fucking-where! ROY KENT!!”

I enjoyed the movie but that reveal is going to keep me fired up for a while. 

[Anela]

This was the first movie in the double feature at the drive-in. We arrived late, because there was a really long line, and I hadn't realized until we'd finally got in, and been watching for twenty minutes, that it was the opening weekend. 

I didn't think it was great, but I'm not really into these movies. Maybe if this evening hadn't been so hectic, and we'd got there well before it started, I might have been enjoyed it more. 

I had to google to see who was playing Zeus, because he looked familiar, but I wasn't expecting Russell Crowe. I also didn't recognize Christian Bale, until he was dying. The quote of his, from an article above, made me smile. "I haven't entered anything!" and how they had to explain the MCU to him. :) Luckily, we weren't at a movie theatre, because I said loudly, "That's Christian Bale!" 

I like Natalie Portman, but my dad didn't know who she was. I told him that a woman on twitter, wasn't happy with something they did with her character, but she didn't say what it was, because of spoilers. Dad asked, "Is that her?" My dad has seen another Thor movie, and didn't mind that one. He didn't enjoy this one at all, but he was also really tired.

[Racj82]

Look, I'm not here for all this Korg slander.

I love how sweet he is. Everyone always gets along with him even if Thor annoys them.

I get tired of debates over Marvel's humor. The reality is that most crowd pleasers and blockbusters are packed with jokes. Some work and some don't. They may have a higher joke count than some movies but comedy always goes hand and hand with blockbusters.

I will agree that some acting felt off at times. The time it really stuck out was with Siff. She sounded like she was doing one of the Thor stage plays with Matt Damon.

I've always hated Tessa's Val voice.

They really have a younger apprentice for every og avenger at this point. Even further than that with Wanda's kids, Scott's daughter, etc.

I just have a good time with this stuff. Im not going into it looking for anything other than that.

I was worried Gorr was going to use wish to heal Jane. Not because I hate Jane but I just need more people to truly die in these things.

Honestly, long term, I don't buy Portman in the mcu long term. It's not a great fit.

I don't understand how I found the goats so annoying at first but I was cackling when I heard them later on.

It's kind of interesting having Vallyrie and Korg talking love since they do and have loved the same gender. That is new for the mcu.

I will say a bunch of the action was hard to follow. Basically whenever there was a big group fight scene I was like, I kind of can't follow what's going on.

But, as I predicted, people kept worrying about the tone of the trailers when it really was no different than Ragnarok. Plenty of heart and pathos with a good heaping of humor all mixed together.

It's honestly kind of amazing for most religions to stand up in the mcu next to actual heroes and gods that do save them. Gods they can actually see instead of hope and believe they exist.

[Chyromaniac]

Whelp, I guess Sif’s arm didn’t die an honorable death in battle after all…

[SeanC]

6 hours ago, Racj82 said:

I get tired of debates over Marvel's humor. The reality is that most crowd pleasers and blockbusters are packed with jokes. Some work and some don't. They may have a higher joke count than some movies but comedy always goes hand and hand with blockbusters.

To the extent that that's the case, it's people copying the current Marvel formula. If you look at Thor: Love and Thunder in comparison to this summer's highest-grossing film, Top Gun: Maverick, for instance, there's a pretty big difference in how it approaches humour and stakes. Or how the MCU formula compares to a lot of the best earlier superhero movies.

[Racj82]

1 hour ago, SeanC said:

To the extent that that's the case, it's people copying the current Marvel formula. If you look at Thor: Love and Thunder in comparison to this summer's highest-grossing film, Top Gun: Maverick, for instance, there's a pretty big difference in how it approaches humour and stakes. Or how the MCU formula compares to a lot of the best earlier superhero movies.

I'm not just talking right now. For a long time action movies were the big blockbusters. Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Arnold and Sly movies. These movies are packed with jokes. Independence day? Tons of silly shit. How they are presented and how much will differ for any film but I'm just saying that this phenomenon isn't new. It's just another criticism lobbied at marvel that they didn't invent.

I've only ever had a problem with the comedy undercutting tension and serious moments. There is far less of that these days.

[SeanC]

6 minutes ago, Racj82 said:

I've only ever had a problem with the comedy undercutting tension and serious moments. 

Which is what Marvel does all the time, and that's the main thing they get criticized for.

[kiddo82]

Dan Murrell is a reviewer I really respect and he is fair if nothing else.  He really understands the nuance to critiquing a film and I couldn’t agree more with his take about how the difference between a splat and a fresh tomato isn’t usually this drastic difference of opinions. 

I think this movie is enjoyable but also a bit of mess.  I don’t think my main problem was the humor, although I agree with the critique that a lot of it didn’t even feel organic.  I think it’s more that this felt like it could have been 3 different movies, as Dan points out in his review, and the tone of each was quite different. You have the Jane/Mighty Thor stuff, the Gorr stuff, and the Thor vs the other gods stuff.  I know from his other movies that Waititi usually threads that tonal needle really well (even in Ragnarok which still feels like one cohesive movie even if the jokes get to be too much for some) so it feels like he either didn’t know what movie he wanted to make or the studio didn’t know what movie they wanted him to make.  I think if someone with any decision making power just picked a lane this could have been upper tier.  As it stands, it’s not a bad offering but it is flawed. 

And for the love of Pete, more Valkyrie next time.  Please and thank you. 

I was with a group who could not appreciate the Brett Goldstein tease.  And my friends who will appreciate it haven't seen the movie yet.  So I'm just here geeking out over it on my own. 

Edited July 10, 2022 by kiddo82

[Racj82]

2 hours ago, SeanC said:

Which is what Marvel does all the time, and that's the main thing they get criticized for.

And as I said, I don't think that's been the case as much lately. For example, most of the comedy here was consistent with the moment or the character. It just didn't all land.

But, I've grown to not care what reviewers and others think of these movies. I usually ending up feeling like most of the critiques are overblown. And with this movie, it was more of the same for me in that regard.

Edited July 10, 2022 by Racj82

[Spartan Girl]

It was at least better than Multiverse of Madness. Or at least more fun.

I have a feeling Feige put the brakes on Tessa and Taika’s original intent to have Valkyrie look for her new queen, which is a crying shame. Sif was RIGHT THERE! Hell, she even had a great rapport with Jane. It feels like such a waste of potential.

I did love the beginning montage showing Thor getting his god bod back and escapades with the Guardians. That deserves its own Disney+ series.

LMAO to the cameos. Bigger LMAO to Stormbreaker acting like a jealous girlfriend.

Yeah, miss me with the woobification of Gorr. He lost his daughter, but had no qualms about harming the Asgardian children? Like Christian Bale, but I prefer Hela, who was just fabulously evil, no apologia required.

I left this film feeling the same way I did about Endgame: had a great time until the ending. They really just brought back Jane Foster, let her be awesome, as the Mighty Thor, only to let her die of cancer at the end?! Seriously! Yes, I KNOW that’s how it happened in the comics, but to have this on top of fridging Natasha and Gamora, screwing over Sharon and Wanda’s character arcs by vilifying them, then throwing a house on Wanda?! The MCU needs to seriously reevaluate how it does its female characters because it seems like unless you’re the titular character, new junior sidekick, or Peggy Carter, you’re going to wind up sidelined or screwed over in some way.

And did poor Thor really need to lose ANOTHER person he loved? Granted, I get that was the whole theme of the story, losing people hurts but the pain is better than shutting down and you can always find unexpected happiness by moving on—gee, that same lesson should have been applied to Endgame Steve, but he gets to selfishly cheat fate while Thor and Jane just have to accept cancer?! Ughhhhhhh.

It still was good to have Jane back. I always liked Jane, and even if their relationship wasn’t going to last, there was still love there. The relationship flashbacks were adorable. And now I want to know what her last catchphrase that she whispered to Thor was! 

And hey, winding up in Valhalla was at least a better deal than Wanda got. Am I the only one that thought her dress looked a lot like Princess Leia’s outfit?

If nothing else, Chris Hemsworth was great as always. Looking good in Star Lord’s chopped up clothes, the toga, or nothing at all 😍😍😍😍😍, being adorable with Jane and the Asgard kids, and winding up as Love’s guardian. It’s a good place to end up with, but I would love to see him face off Hercules.

So while it wasn’t Ragnorok I’ll be perfectly happy to watch it again.

Edited July 10, 2022 by Spartan Girl

[Racj82]

20 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

I left this film feeling the same way I did about Endgame: had a great time until the ending. They really just brought back Jane Foster, let her be awesome, as the Mighty Thor, only to let her die of cancer at the end?! Seriously! Yes, I KNOW that’s how it happened in the comics, but to have this on top of fridging Natasha and Gamora, screwing over Sharon and Wanda’s character arcs by vilifying them, then throwing a house on Wanda?! The MCU needs to seriously reevaluate how it does its female characters because it seems like unless you’re the titular character, new junior sidekick, or Peggy Carter, you’re going to wind up sidelined or screwed over in some way.

I must state again. Nobody was fridged. Not Gamora, not Natasha not Jane. Gamora still exists in the mcu. They all died for different reasons just like characters do. A person's gender shouldn't dictate whether they live, die, turn bad or whatever.

Realistically Natalie was never sticking around long term. That's not her bag. Her character got to be a badass warrior with a full arc. Not every hero presented needs to be around for 3 to 5 years.

[Spartan Girl]

I didn’t mean to imply that I thought Jane was fridged. Like I said before, her story arc in Love and Thunder probably would have come off better if I wasn’t already a tad oversensitive over how Wanda, Sharon, Natasha, and Gamora were handled. And while gender shouldn’t matter in these things, it seems to be more frequently (and not as well written) with female MCU characters.

Forgot to mention that I loved the music. Especially the rock version of the Marvel intro.

It’s interesting that using Eternia to cure Jane’s cancer wasn’t an option. I respect that. But like it’s been with all the Phase 4 movies, nobody is allowed to cheat fate with magic consequence-free unless they’re Steve Rogers 🙄

Edited July 10, 2022 by Spartan Girl

[Racj82]

Well. 135 million dollar debut. I'm sure some how there will be more articles talking about how people are tired of marvel and all that!

The people who are tired or dissatisfied with marvel are in the firm minority.

It helps that I'm not worry about these things building to something in phase 4. They are rebuilding. They also have no desire to build to a Endgame sized story.

We sure is as hell must be getting a young avengers movie in the next few years. We basically already have the line up.

[cambridgeguy]

2 hours ago, Racj82 said:

Realistically Natalie was never sticking around long term. That's not her bag. Her character got to be a badass warrior with a full arc. Not every hero presented needs to be around for 3 to 5 years.

And she can easily be brought back if both sides agree to it.  If not, fine, then there's a good reason for her not showing up during the next crisis that Thor's involved with.  If she decides she wants Disney to pay for her workouts, then hey, it turns out it is possible to return from Valhalla.  Who knew?

And I suspect that when Hemsworth decides he's going to join RDJ, Evans, and SJ in MCU retirement then they're probably going to film a scene with him reuniting with Jane in the afterlife.  Or seeing Loki again. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Racj82 said:

Well. 135 million dollar debut. I'm sure some how there will be more articles talking about how people are tired of marvel and all that!

It made 143 million making it the 12th largest MCU opening. It’s the best opening for a Thor movie.

2 hours ago, Racj82 said:

The people who are tired or dissatisfied with marvel are in the firm minority.

The majority don’t care one way or the other. They go to what movies look good. The need for every box office results to have some greater meaning is exhausting. 

[Bill1978]

4 hours ago, Racj82 said:

We sure is as hell must be getting a young avengers movie in the next few years. We basically already have the line up.

We better, cause I've been sitting on the sidelines patiently waiting for something ever since Ant-Man introduced Cassie into the MCU. I was hoping that MoM was going to give us aged by Tommy and Billy, so was disappointed they didn't. My next hope is that The Marvels introduce Teddy (or strongly hint), because ever since Captain Marvel introduced the Skrull/Kree issue I felt they were laying down the groundwork to explain Hulking's background.

I haven't decided yet if I should make the trek to see this Thor in the cinema before I head back to work - combination of not wanting to sit in a cinema filled with people who cheer at every tiny little thing and knowing good chance this will drop early on Disney+ like MoM did saving me an hour's drive to the cinema.

[StatisticalOutlier]

I know nothing about Marvel whatsoever, but have seen the trailer a few times and laughed out loud at the scene where Thor's clothes fall off and some guy on the dais faints.  I didn't know these movies are funny.

That alone wasn't necessarily enough to make me go, but now y'all talking about these goats may have tipped the balance.

[SeanC]

7 hours ago, Racj82 said:

Well. 135 million dollar debut. I'm sure some how there will be more articles talking about how people are tired of marvel and all that!

The film's B+ Cinemascore is bad for a film of this type, for the record, so we'll see how its legs go.

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, SeanC said:

The film's B+ Cinemascore is bad for a film of this type, for the record, so we'll see how its legs go.

Same score as MoM which hasn’t hurt the domestic box office at all. I was very surprised to see the MoM is the 8th top grossing MCU movie domestically and has nearly hit a billion internationally. Love and Thunder seems to be better received overall so it should be fine long term. Opening weekend alone puts it 9th for 2022. 

[SeanC]

21 minutes ago, Dani said:

Same score as MoM which hasn’t hurt the domestic box office at all. 

Multiverse of Madness did not have good legs; it made almost half its domestic gross on opening weekend, decidedly on the lower end of MCU multipliers. It obviously made plenty of money, as will Love and Thunder.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, SeanC said:

Multiverse of Madness did not have good legs; it made almost half its domestic gross on opening weekend, decidedly on the lower end of MCU multipliers. It obviously made plenty of money, as will Love and Thunder.

I would say that it’s legs were good for a post-Covid MCU movie with Disney’s new 45-day theatrical window. These movies just aren’t going to have amazing multipliers when people know it will be streaming next month. 

[Racj82]

5 hours ago, Dani said:

It made 143 million making it the 12th largest MCU opening. It’s the best opening for a Thor movie.

The majority don’t care one way or the other. They go to what movies look good. The need for every box office results to have some greater meaning is exhausting. 

The numbers changed from first estimates.

The numbers have become this weird thing used and overanalyzed to spell the down fall of almost everything. As with most things, the facts are usually a little bit more complicated.

At the end of the day, what the mcu is doing right now cant be compared to the build up to endgame. Its often said that the mcu is one giant tv series in movie (and now tv) form. Thus, you cant really compare the beginning of a season to the end in terms of goals and importance. Im just going along for the ride. There is plenty of time for bigger stories but its okay imo, to slow things down and set up character for their next journeys.

[Racj82]

1 hour ago, SeanC said:

The film's B+ Cinemascore is bad for a film of this type, for the record, so we'll see how its legs go.

That's not bad for a film of any type. Most movies these days are front loaded. None of it really means anything. Also, with the 45 day window repeat viewing is likely to happen. You can watch it again a little over a month. Having a good opening is most important right now.

This movie for a bunch of reasons isn't ranking as high as Ragnarok but that doesn't mean it isn't liked or a success. Ragnarok came out in a different time for movies but it was also this injection of fun into Thor that was needed and celebrated. It's hard to keep riding that wave. It was bound to be disappoint a bit with the surprise factor worn off.

[Shannon L.]

I guess I'm the odd man out. While it had some fun moments, overall, I thought it was not good.  I thought it was much sillier than Ragnarok, to the point of being ridiculous, and, while I understand the need to keep a sense of humor during difficult times (my mom died of cancer and right up until near the end, she and my dad were joking with each other), I was almost angry that such a serious story line was surrounded by such ridiculousness.  I just thought it could have been a much, much better movie if it wasn't played for so many laughs.

[Spartan Girl]

55 minutes ago, Shannon L. said:

I guess I'm the odd man out. While it had some fun moments, overall, I thought it was not good.  I thought it was much sillier than Ragnarok, to the point of being ridiculous, and, while I understand the need to keep a sense of humor during difficult times (my mom died of cancer and right up until near the end, she and my dad were joking with each other), I was almost angry that such a serious story line was surrounded by such ridiculousness.  I just thought it could have been a much, much better movie if it wasn't played for so many laughs.

I do wish it had been toned down just a tad so that it wouldn’t completely overshadow Jane’s cancer storyline. The stuff with Thor/Jane when she finally told him and when Thor begged her to stop using the hammer because he didn’t want her to die, but ultimately realized that he’d rather have a limited time with her than none at all were some of the best parts of the movie.

That being said, I did like that Thor and Jane didn’t dwell too much any any bitterness from their breakup. That was refreshing.

[Racj82]

1 hour ago, Shannon L. said:

I guess I'm the odd man out. While it had some fun moments, overall, I thought it was not good.  I thought it was much sillier than Ragnarok, to the point of being ridiculous, and, while I understand the need to keep a sense of humor during difficult times (my mom died of cancer and right up until near the end, she and my dad were joking with each other), I was almost angry that such a serious story line was surrounded by such ridiculousness.  I just thought it could have been a much, much better movie if it wasn't played for so many laughs.

You are not in the minority. You literally said a bunch of things people have been complaining about.

It didn't bother me that much. I didn't much more dwelling on the serious plots. Liked it but didn't love it is the place I'm in. For me, that's not a crime. I don't love most things I watch. But, I like and enjoy a lot of it.

[MaggieG]

I loved the little montage of Thor and Jane in their dating life. Especially Thor's hot dog costume and him grabbing Mjolnir when they were watching a scary movie. 

For some reason, Sam Neill as Odin crawling off stage during the performance had me howling. 

I wanted a little more with the Guardians. I'm sad we didn't get a scene with Rocket and Thor since they didn't get snapped and spent more time together than Peter and Thor. Plus they worked together on the time heist in Endgame.

Loved the little kids battling at the end. 

Edited July 11, 2022 by MaggieG

[SeanC]

10 hours ago, Racj82 said:

That's not bad for a film of any type.

A B+ is not a good Cinemascore, since it is a poll of self-selected people who expect to like the movie. Anything not in the A-range is considered a disappointment.

[Hiyo]

I dunno, for me, anything higher than a B is worth checking out.

[Shannon L.]

1 hour ago, Racj82 said:

You are not in the minority. You literally said a bunch of things people have been complaining about.

Is that with critics?  Because the vast majority of fan reviews here and on other boards that I frequent are that they liked or even loved it.

[tv echo]

Box Office: ‘Thor: Love and Thunder’ Lands Mighty $143 Million Debut
By Rebecca Rubin   July 10, 2022
https://variety.com/2022/film/box-office/thor-love-and-thunder-opening-weekend-1235312903/ 

Quote

Disney’s “Thor: Love and Thunder,” the fourth standalone Marvel story about Chris Hemsworth’s hunky Asgardian superhero, hammered home a box office win with its $143 million debut.

The movie, which is playing in 4,375 North American theaters, arrived ever-so-slightly behind estimates of $150 million, but those opening weekend returns are unquestionably something to celebrate. Notably, “Thor 4” enjoyed a bigger start than its predecessor, 2017’s quirky action-comedy “Thor: Ragnarok,” which opened to $123 million in North America. “Love and Thunder” also notched the third-biggest opening weekend of the year behind “Jurassic World Dominion” ($145 million) and “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” ($185 million).
*  *  *
At the international box office, “Love and Thunder” opened ahead of expectations with $159 million from 47 markets, pushing its global tally to a mighty $302 million. The film cost $250 million to produce and roughly $100 million to promote.

Opening weekend crowds for “Thor: Love and Thunder” were overwhelmingly male, with men representing 60% of ticket buyers. “Thor” also greatly benefitted from Imax, 3D and other premium formats, which accounted for 36% of global ticket sales. Imax alone brought in $23 million worldwide, including $13.8 million in North America.

‘Thor: Love And Thunder’ Goes Loud With $143M Opening Weekend – Sunday AM Box Office Update
By Anthony D'Alessandro   July 10, 2022
https://deadline.com/2022/07/box-office-thor-love-and-thunder-1235060300/ 

Quote

UPDATED, Sunday AM after Saturday PM writethru: Disney/Marvel’s Thor: Love and Thunder held steady on Saturday, despite those lower than normal CinemaScore and PostTrak exits for a Marvel Cinematic Universe title. The Taika Waititi-directed sequel grossed $42.1M yesterday which is 4% above Friday’s true take of $40.5M (That’s $69.5M less $29M Thursday previews). This will get Thor: Love and Thunder to a $143M opening, per Disney. Worldwide is $302M, just like Nancy and I told you.

That number is the 12th-best opening for a Marvel Cinematic Universe title, after Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol 2‘s $146.5M. As we mentioned previously, the wonderful thing for motion picture studios as they put tentpoles out in the rebounding pandemic marketplace is that critical scores and exits aren’t watering down grosses like they did during pre-pandemic days.
*  *  *
Thor, like Jurassic World dinosaurs, is a big enough franchise to keep moviegoers coming, and again, this is the best the Norse Marvel superhero has ever opened in his history. Compared to Thor: Ragnarok, Thor: Love and Thunder pulled in a more diverse crowd, with more Hispanic and Latino (near a third of all ticket buyers, per PostTrak) and Asian at 13%.
*  *  *
Eighty-six of the audience was general, with 9% parents and 5% kids under 12. The moviegoing 18-34 demo repped 53% of Thor 4‘s weekend audience.

Marvel Studios' Thor: Love and Thunder | Number One Movie In The World
Marvel Entertainment   Jul 10, 2022

Behind the Scenes Secrets from the Thor: Love and Thunder Cast!
Marvel Entertainment   Jul 8, 2022

[Racj82]

2 hours ago, Shannon L. said:

Is that with critics?  Because the vast majority of fan reviews here and on other boards that I frequent are that they liked or even loved it.

It's basically been reviewed as okay or liked with issues by mostly everyone. You can also read through here and a bunch of other places with streams of complaints about consistent tone, too much Korg, not enough Jane, etc. So, you are not in the minority.

2 hours ago, SeanC said:

A B+ is not a good Cinemascore, since it is a poll of self-selected people who expect to like the movie. Anything not in the A-range is considered a disappointment.

Man, none of that crap matters. The vast majority of people aren't engaged in any of that stuff. The movie is liked but not loved for the most part. B+ Cinemascore. There you go. Anything where an A grade is the only level of success is not something to be taken seriously.

[Morrigan2575]

4 hours ago, SeanC said:

A B+ is not a good Cinemascore, since it is a poll of self-selected people who expect to like the movie. Anything not in the A-range is considered a disappointment.

Yep

4 hours ago, Hiyo said:

I dunno, for me, anything higher than a B is worth checking out.

From an Industry perspective anything less than an A usually indicates a depressed box office...which is all they care about. 

It's been awhile but IIRC a low Cinemascore usually means bad word of mouth, which means a movie doesn't have legs.

Of course Marvel movies are front loaded so who knows 🤷‍♀️

[Hiyo]

So there has never been a movie in the history of time that wasn't successful with less than an A Cinemascore rating?

[arc]

Good thing I don't particularly love GOTG or the "Asgardians of the Galaxy" because that part felt entirely perfunctory. Thor waiting out the early stages of that first battle made no sense. Thor smashing the temple was a cheap joke that didn't really land, esp because (1) the audience has no reason to care and (2) even the aliens whose sacred temple it was didn't care that much and (3) not that the movie got into it, but why should anyone care about a temple to now-murdered gods?

Honestly, even the aliens giving their super-goats onto Thor didn't really land. It felt like they hated the goats and were trying to foist them off onto Thor both out of convenience and as partial revenge for his collateral damage, but it just didn't land. As cool as it was to see the mythical goats, I think the movie might have been better served setting up All-Father Thor by giving him the ravens instead of the goats. He already lost an eye a few movies ago!

Gorr's rampage would have been appalling but more justified if he'd only been taking out callous gods like his own, but as it shook out it was almost the opposite: killing the good ones (or better ones, anyways) and leaving the most corrupt and selfish to live happy lives in Omnipotence City.

The second half of the movie moved a lot better with more heartfelt emotions and I liked it a lot. Somehow, even though I'd read the comics, I wasn't expecting Jane to die... I really thought Thor was gonna solo Gorr. I guess I'll fall for schmuck bait too. And then when Jane did appear at Valhalla in the post-credits scene, I really thought she was gonna reject it, the way it worked out in the comics. Double d'oh for me.

I kinda wish Jane's use of Mjolnir had been more like it was in the comics, but I guess a super-maneuverable projectile has already been done in the movies with Yondu's arrow. And being able to control Mjolnir's fragments was a neat MCU specific way to evoke how she was using it differently than Thor ever did.

[SeanC]

2 hours ago, Racj82 said:

Man, none of that crap matters. The vast majority of people aren't engaged in any of that stuff. 

I'm not even sure what you mean by this. Cinemascore is a poll of theatregoers, it is by definition a measurement of general sentiment.

31 minutes ago, Hiyo said:

So there has never been a movie in the history of time that wasn't successful with less than an A Cinemascore rating?

Nobody said that. It was noted that it's generally not a good sign for multiplier, as it wasn't for Multiverse of Madness.

[Hiyo]

Multiverse of Madness has made over $900 million, not sure how or why that is seen as a bad thing. It's the 11th best MCU box office to date, which isn't a bad thing.

[kiddo82]

39 minutes ago, arc said:

And then when Jane did appear at Valhalla in the post-credits scene, I really thought she was gonna reject it, the way it worked out in the comics. Double d'oh for me.

I don't have the comics for reference but I also wondered if Jane would reject Valhalla as well.  Assuming she believes her own mother made it to some sort of afterlife, I would have thought she'd be a little torn and might want to inquire about that one first.

Also, much as I like Jane, it's hard to see her dying moments as some great sacrifice.  I don't want to take away from her hero moment but wouldn't a lot of people have made the same choice?  The writing was on the wall for her one way or another.  It would have been way more interesting if the hammer giveth and it taketh at the same time.  Like, if it was healing her in small doses but any great uses of power would have zapped her faster than could be replenished.  Then you have an actual dilemma.  Good for her for getting that chance to literally go out fighting though.

Edited July 11, 2022 by kiddo82

[arc]

(Moon Knight slight spoiler)

Spoiler

Considering the way Moon Knight's Egyptian gods not only acknowledged their own afterlife setup but also the existence of the Wakandan afterlife,

it sure seems like Gorr's own god just didn't set up an afterlife for his own people out of sheer malignant negligence.

[Starfish35]

55 minutes ago, SeanC said:

I'm not even sure what you mean by this. Cinemascore is a poll of theatregoers, it is by definition a measurement of general sentiment.

Nobody said that. It was noted that it's generally not a good sign for multiplier, as it wasn't for Multiverse of Madness.

Yep.  The Deadline article linked above talks about the Cinemascore as a predictor of the movie’s multiplier.

Quote

When it comes to the box office legs for a MCU movie, those “A” CinemaScores do make a difference. Spider-Man: No Way Home with an A+ CinemaScore saw a 3.1x multiple off its $260.1M 3-day opening, landing it at a domestic final of $804.7M. Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, which had an A, generated a near 3x multiple off its $75.3M 3-day, for a $224.5M stateside final gross. However, Eternals, with a B CinemaScore, posted a 2.3x multiple, while Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness with its B+ saw a 2.19x off its $187.4M opening, which is resulting in a current domestic take of $411M. Can Thor: Love and Thunder defeat the odds? It’s the only massive crowdpleaser, arguably until Warner Bros/DC’s Black Adam arrives on Oct. 21 and Black Panther: Wakanda Forever on Nov. 11.

[tv echo]

Taika Waititi reveals 'Thor: Love and Thunder' secrets, including the Taylor Swift meme that's in the movie
Jason Guerrasio  July 11, 2022
https://www.insider.com/thor-love-and-thunder-taika-waititi-interview-secrets-spoilers-2022-7 

Quote

Insider spoke on the phone with Waititi, while he was taking a break from writing his upcoming "Star Wars" movie, to discuss "Love and Thunder" secrets and spoilers, including the movie magic done to make Natalie Portman look like she's 6 feet tall; why Waititi never wants the deleted scenes featuring Jeff Goldblum, Lena Headey, and Peter Dinklage to ever be seen; and why Russell Crowe shot all his scenes twice: once in a Greek accent and once in a British accent.
*  *  *
Natalie Portman's Jane Foster character becomes Mighty Thor and with that she goes from being 5 foot 3 inches to around 6 feet tall. So was she just walking on stilts or standing on boxes this whole movie? How did you pull off her looking like she was taller?
We built a whole bunch of decking around the set. First we would block out the scene — mark out where the actors have to go so the crew knows the whole layout — and once we did that we build an elevated platform that was 4 feet high from the floor that she would walk on. But we also had to leave room so Chris and Tessa could walk around at regular height. It was a weird maze. But it worked.
*  *  *
At the start of the movie Thor is still with the Guardians of the Galaxy. Was there a version of the story where there was more of the Guardians group in the movie?
The plan was always to have them in the beginning and then move on. Because they have their own movie. There was talk about having them come back at the end.

That was my feeling: you are introducing them in the beginning because they are going to swoop in at the end.
The thing is that happens in every movie. No more. No more of the cavalry coming at the end. So we shelved that idea. We just wanted Jane to come in at the end.
*  *  *
Russell Crowe has a Greek accent playing Zeus. I like to think he just showed up on the first day of shooting with that voice. 
No. You would love to think that, I would love to think that. We actually talked at length about the accent. We wondered if someone did a Greek accent of a Greek god, is it going to be a farce? Will it be too silly? And Russell was very much wanting it to be Greek. But I wasn't sure, so we ended up doing two versions of every take with Russell. One in a Greek accent and then another in a British accent. Because I felt people would think Zeus would sound British like Laurence Olivier in "Clash of the Titans."

Wow.
But then I realized in post that it's actually more offensive to the Greeks to have Zeus sound like he's British. And test audiences loved the Greek accent. I'm really happy with it. But, yeah, he had to do every take once in the Greek accent and once with a British accent because I couldn't make up my mind. But Russell was right all along. 
*  *  *
Throughout the movie Jane is trying to come up with a cool catchphrase for herself. At the end there's a great moment where Jane whispers her Mighty Thor catchphrase to Thor. We don't hear it. Is there actually a catchphrase?
It's like, does Bill Murray ever really say anything to Scarlett Johansson in "Lost in Translation"?
...
Even when we were shooting it we were like, "Yeah, we're just taking this from 'Lost in Translation.'" But, I don't know what she said. I would like to think it's something like, "Your ass is still mine." [Laughs.] "Your ass will always be mine."

At the very end of the movie it says, "Thor will be back," so do you —
Well, guess what? That was a surprise to me, too.
...
I'm not joking. I saw it in the theater and I was like, "Oh, shit. Really?" Even Chris was like, "What?" But, of course he'll be back. He's the best character. I mean, I may be a little biased, but he's the most fun to watch.

Now, I don't know what would be next. I would definitely do one, but only if Chris did it. But it would need to be something surprising and unexpected for me to want to do it. Like what would be the new take? The battles and all the fighting is fine, but I would want something that feels unexpected when it comes to the story. Like making just a $5 million movie with no fighting at all, just Thor on a road trip. Like "Nebraska."
*  *  *
There's a lot you shot that was left on the cutting room floor. Is there something you're most disappointed isn't in the movie?
...
And if you ask any of those actors who were cut out — Jeff Goldblum, Lena Headey, Peter Dinklage — they all understand how it works. They have been in the game long enough. But that's just the way I look at things. 

Edited July 11, 2022 by tv echo

[Guest]

9 hours ago, SeanC said:

A B+ is not a good Cinemascore, since it is a poll of self-selected people who expect to like the movie. Anything not in the A-range is considered a disappointment.

Or self-selected to be way more critical than regular audiences. Thor got at B+, The Dark World got an A- and Ragnorak got an A. Very few people are going to agree with ranking the Thor movies that way.

With blockbusters the scale is extremely condensed and not particularly useful. If a movie gets and A or A+ most people will probably like it. A- or B+ and people predisposed to like it probably will, those predisposed to dislike it probably will and those in the middle will be probably enjoy it to varying degrees but not love it. 

B+ is still a good score for most potential audience members (ie. those who were already interested in going). I like superhero movies so I am probably going to enjoy a Marvel movie that gets a B+. I would probably not enjoy a war movie that gets a B+ because I am less of a fan of the genre. 

[SeanC]

53 minutes ago, Dani said:

Or self-selected to be way more critical than regular audiences.

No, it's a random poll of people who saw the movie. Which is to say, people who have already decided that they will probably like the movie by choosing to go see it.

[Racj82]

4 hours ago, Hiyo said:

Multiverse of Madness has made over $900 million, not sure how or why that is seen as a bad thing. It's the 11th best MCU box office to date, which isn't a bad thing.

Yes. That's is my point.

[Racj82]

5 hours ago, arc said:

Good thing I don't particularly love GOTG or the "Asgardians of the Galaxy" because that part felt entirely perfunctory. Thor waiting out the early stages of that first battle made no sense. Thor smashing the temple was a cheap joke that didn't really land, esp because (1) the audience has no reason to care and (2) even the aliens whose sacred temple it was didn't care that much and (3) not that the movie got into it, but why should anyone care about a temple to now-murdered gods?

Honestly, even the aliens giving their super-goats onto Thor didn't really land. It felt like they hated the goats and were trying to foist them off onto Thor both out of convenience and as partial revenge for his collateral damage, but it just didn't land. As cool as it was to see the mythical goats, I think the movie might have been better served setting up All-Father Thor by giving him the ravens instead of the goats. He already lost an eye a few movies ago!

The aliens were pretty pissed off about it. That's why they didn't want to talk about it with Thor. And the goats seem to be a custom they would do regardless. But, by that point, they just wanted to get him off the planet.

[Guest]

15 hours ago, SeanC said:

No, it's a random poll of people who saw the movie. Which is to say, people who have already decided that they will probably like the movie by choosing to go see it.

Yes, I know how Cinemascore works. It’s based on audiences who go within the first 24 hours. My point was that generally isn’t going to be casual viewers or even the average Marvel fan. It is going to be heavily weighted towards the fanatics who are often the most critical. Viewers who are going to focus on things that more casual fans aren’t going to. Sadly, that also includes a certain toxic element of the fandom who go to solely to declare certain movies a failure. Many times the exact fans that I trust least when it comes to reviews. 

Before 2021 only one MCU movie got below an A- (Thor) and there have been three is the last year. The scale for these movies is shifting. I absolutely think the movies that got lower scores have problems but no one will ever convince me they are worse than Hulk, The Dark World or Iron Man 3.