Roger Ebert Reviews Thor

Roger Ebert Reviews Thor

The veteran film critic gives his take on the God of Thunder, and it's not exactly positive...

Review Opinion
By ckirk8 - May 12, 2011 11:05 AM EST
Filed Under: Thor
Source: Chicago Sun-Times



Thanks to the Chicago Sun-Times, we now have film critic Roger Ebert's incredibly negative review of Marvel Studios' latest blockbuster, Thor. Since the review is too long to post into an article, I've taken significant quotes from it and posted them below. You can read the review in its entirety in the above source.

"The failure of 'Thor' begins at the story level, with a screenplay that essentially links special effects. Some of the dialog is mock heroic ('You are unworthy of your title, and I'll take from you your power!') and some of it winks ironically ('You know, for a crazy homeless person... he's pretty cut.') It adapts the original Stan Lee strategy for Marvel, where characters sometimes spoke out of character."

"Thor to begin with is not an interesting character. The gods of Greek, Roman and Norse mythology share the same problem, which is that what you see is what you get. They're defined by their attributes, not their personalities...Thor is a particularly limited case. What does he do? He wields a hammer. That is what he does."

"The Frost Giants spend most of their time being frosty in their subzero sphere of Jotunheim and occasionally freezing their enemies. Thor's brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is dark-haired, skinny, shifty-eyed and sadly lacking in charisma. He might as well be wearing a name tag: "Hi! I can't be trusted!" These villains lack adequate interest to supply a climactic battle, so the plot provides a Metal Giant, sends him to the New Mexico town, and has him blast fiery rays that blow up gas stations real good but always miss his targets. He is apparently stopped by a sword through his spine, but why does he need a spine since when his mask lifts we can see his head is an empty cavern?"

"And what about that town? It seems to be partly a set with two interiors (the diner and Jane's office) and partly CGI. It seems to go for a few blocks and then end abruptly in barren desert...Why can't the Metal Giant attack the Golden Gate Bridge or scale a Trump Tower somewhere? Who cares he if turns a 7-Eleven into a fireball?"

"The standards for comic book superhero movies have been established by 'Superman,' 'The Dark Knight,' 'Spider-Man 2' and 'Iron Man.' In that company 'Thor' is pitiful. Consider even the comparable villains (Lex Luthor, the Joker, Doc Ock and Obadiah Stane). Memories of all four come instantly to mind. Will you be thinking of Loki six minutes after this movie is over?"
THOR 5: Chris Hemsworth Addresses His MCU Future And Says That There's Nothing Official (Yet)
Related:

THOR 5: Chris Hemsworth Addresses His MCU Future And Says That There's "Nothing Official" (Yet)

RUMOR: THOR 5 Scheduled To Film Next Year; Writer And Director Currently Being Sought
Recommended For You:

RUMOR: THOR 5 Scheduled To Film Next Year; Writer And Director Currently Being Sought

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2 3
Draven1369
Draven1369 - 5/12/2011, 11:38 AM
He is an old man and a fool. (sorry couldn't resist)
PartyHard
PartyHard - 5/12/2011, 11:41 AM
HA!
Dumegg
Dumegg - 5/12/2011, 11:45 AM
screw Ebert! that asshole thinks doc ock was a better villan than loki.
StrangerX
StrangerX - 5/12/2011, 11:45 AM
This guy is so [frick]ing depressing.
LordHuck
LordHuck - 5/12/2011, 11:47 AM
This guy is done. He has watched too many films. He is too Jaded. He’s antiquated. When you have seen it all, everything becomes a cliché. Does anyone under 60 care what this old fellow has to say anymore?
Choppaholic26
Choppaholic26 - 5/12/2011, 11:49 AM
I can see his point as valid on everything except for his opinion on Loki. He was so awesome in Thor. No charisma? GTFO.
Ethic
Ethic - 5/12/2011, 11:49 AM
I assumed he just didn't like fun superhero films but then he said he likes Spiderman 2 and Iron Man, hmm.

Meh, I thought it was a lot of fun and loved the actors in it.
May not be "The Godfather" but it's a good film in my opinion, which is why I went to it twice. =]
NightmareB4
NightmareB4 - 5/12/2011, 11:50 AM
Yeah...this is the man who liked the REMAKE of Death at a Funeral more than the original.

He's going senile. It's apparent.
Stutzman
Stutzman - 5/12/2011, 11:53 AM
Did he even watch the movie?

"He is apparently stopped by a sword through his spine, but why does he need a spine since when his mask lifts we can see his head is an empty cavern?"

Because that didn't stop the Giant metal robot now did it Roger Ebert.

Tom Hiddleston was some of the best acting in the movie.

Ive said it for years Roger Ebert needs to retire or just die he is out of touch with the common man who would enjoy movies like Thor.
Chewtoy
Chewtoy - 5/12/2011, 11:54 AM
I like Ebert, but he is all over the map in his reviews any more, praising absolutely awful films and trashing solid work as often as the other way around.

Then again, to be fair, Thor was pretty all-over-the-map itself, although I found it to be entertaining throughout. The idea that Loki isn't at all interesting is crazy-talk to me, though. I think Ebert just checked out of this one.
Deadshot
Deadshot - 5/12/2011, 11:54 AM
How could anyone disagree with this? My little brother knew nothing about Thor but immediately knew Loki was going to betray Thor it was insanely obvious. The town looked incredibly fake as well, which is because it was fake for budget reasons I presume. And yeah I doubt anyone is thinking about Loki six minutes after it ends.

On a positive note I thought the film had great comedy and the scene where the five guys fight the frost giants was very cool.
spider1489
spider1489 - 5/12/2011, 11:55 AM
[frick] you old man!!! aaaahhh!!!

@draven LMAO!!
AlexdoxA
AlexdoxA - 5/12/2011, 11:55 AM
This review was written by a great great grandnephew while he was taking one of his "breaks" due to bladder incontingency
elcaballerooscuro92
elcaballerooscuro92 - 5/12/2011, 11:57 AM
loki was awesome!!!
Choppaholic26
Choppaholic26 - 5/12/2011, 12:03 PM
@Matricide

If he had given a positive review:

Me: "Who gives a [frick] what this ignorant old fart thinks? Never gave a shit about his movie reviews never will. Don't care what any critic thinks in general."

Face it, you're a dumbass. Stop generalizing.

I've always thought he was senile since I read "An Open Letter To Roger Ebert" Stupid old man thinks his words are scientific fact, that's what I despise about him.

PartyHard
PartyHard - 5/12/2011, 12:03 PM
@Matricide Your opinion is not an objective fact.
ckirk8
ckirk8 - 5/12/2011, 12:11 PM
While I don't really agree with Ebert's review, I think that some of you are crossing a line with insulting him and telling him to die. I don't share Ebert's views on this movie, but I'll still respect his opinion...
LEEE777
LEEE777 - 5/12/2011, 12:13 PM
[frick] that old *******!

: P

THOR = Epic fantasy masterpiece!


I hope he reviews First Class lmao!
LEEE777
LEEE777 - 5/12/2011, 12:14 PM
True @ ckirk8.

: D
supercajun
supercajun - 5/12/2011, 12:16 PM
The big metal giant was looking for THOR, THOR was in the SMALL TOWN!
Snow43214
Snow43214 - 5/12/2011, 12:17 PM
He lost his marbles years ago, the problem with critics today is that they can't just enjoy a film, they want all films to have some emotional depth and massive personal character changes, such as The Wrestler.

They can't expect an action film to have these kinds of things and when they don't, they slam the film, it's ridiculous, I don't go into a comedy expecting constant inner conflict and drama.

I loved Thor and ironically I believe it has the massive personal change but I went in to enjoy a comic book movie and have a good time, Ebert went in to scrutinise every minute detail, so his opinion is worth sh*t all to me lol

And in response to his question...Loki remained in my mind well over 6 mins after the film.

His thoughts on the film...will not :P
Choppaholic26
Choppaholic26 - 5/12/2011, 12:17 PM
@LEEE

He will call it oscar worthy!

I do agree that we shouldn't be telling him to die, But I don't have to think anything that he says isn't retarded. He tells ME, what to consider art because he knows the scientific formula that sets up what is art. Pssh. Piss off old man.
bleedthefreak
bleedthefreak - 5/12/2011, 12:18 PM
Maybe he watched Syfy's version?

I won't think of Loki six months later, I will be thinking about him forever. Why? Because he played the Best CBM bad guy yet IMO.
LMFA0
LMFA0 - 5/12/2011, 12:18 PM
Ok ok ok I can totally see his opinions and they are all valid. When people who read the script kept posting on this site that it was epic, I believed them. But when I saw the movie I realized they were very wrong. Thor, Loki, Jane, Odin and the rest of the cast were more shells of the sterotypical characters portrayed in every other film ever made and not unique what so ever. My girlfriend and I saw it and she guessed the plot of the movie about 20 minutes into it without any knowledge of Thor or comic books.

He is right. This was an average movie. Not as good as Iron Man or the increadible Hulk but a good movie. The best compliment and insult I heard was when my girlfriend said "is that it? I hope there is a Thor 2!" which means she liked it but it was lacking in screen time and emotion. I liked the movie but I have serious doubts about some peoles opinions on movies if they thought this was the best Marvel movie.
MarkCassidy
MarkCassidy - 5/12/2011, 12:20 PM
I have agreed with Ebert at times, but I generally don't. I find his "reviews" pedantic, harsh, and most of the time inaccurate! It wasn't the sword through the spine that stopped The Destroyer, pay more attention dude! But I also kinda agree about Loki. I really don't get the fuss. Hiddleston was good, at times very good. But the character descended into mustache twirling pantomime imo. Disappointing.
CraptainAmerica
CraptainAmerica - 5/12/2011, 12:26 PM
What a careless, desperate and pretentious attempt at a 'review'. Nothing even remotely touched on performances, the arcs and dynamics that ran though the movie or sought to back up claims that it wasn't as good as other comic book outings. For a review and reviewer that should, supposedly, be respected it was nothing short of embarrassing. No doubt this is a guy who counts 'Chocolat' in his top 5 movies of all time. I watched it. It [frick]in sucked.

Oh, and FYI Roger Ebert. He blew up a small town in New Mexico instead of the Golden Gate Bridge because he was sent to kill Thor...who was fannying about in a small town in New Mexico. You [frick]in numbnuts.
AreTudaEDub
AreTudaEDub - 5/12/2011, 12:43 PM
To be completely on I feel like it was just a long commercial for the Avengers. It didn't have any real depth. Asgard looked amazing, the costumes was were also very good but I feel like the best part of the movie was when Thor was to Heimdal at the end. It was touching to a degree along with most of the parts where Odin spoke with his sons.

But I agree with Mr. Ebert that certain (superhero) movies have set the standard for what the genre should be and what it is. It's like how everyone knows that rap music sucks now (Songwriting QUALITY-wise) compared to the 90’s but you listening to it anyway because it's catchy. I saw Thor feeling like it was mediocre but continued to watch it more so because of its Superhero theme (a genre I’ve always been attracted to). It was just a very superficial movie and didn't leave me thinking about it an hour later. I went home ate a sandwich and washed dishes.

So I just wish people would stop throwing the word "Epic" around like it’s the new "whatever". In all honesty, it was ONLY decent. 7/10
CraptainAmerica
CraptainAmerica - 5/12/2011, 12:51 PM
I'm just curious...@aretuda. Are you a fan of Thor? NIt just aimed at solely yourself. But as a fan of the character I thought the adaptation was very well done. Are you guys viewing it as a movie goer or a comic book fan?
AreTudaEDub
AreTudaEDub - 5/12/2011, 1:23 PM
@CraptainAmerica First I would like to say to you thank you for politely making inquiries regarding my comment (A rarity on such sites). Now to answer your question, I've always had a passing knowledge on Thor as 1.) He was always around but never struck my curiosity and 2.) I grew up watching and reading DC and Marvel comics. So with my knowledge of him I would say I viewed it as a movie goer with a very open mind and a slight 1 up. I really appreciate how Marvel knows the character and traditions of Thor but the are kind of accepting of the fact that their character have and probably always will, sell themselves.
AreTudaEDub
AreTudaEDub - 5/12/2011, 1:29 PM
@CraptainAmerica

PS... and Just because there's a GL pic in my icon I don't want to give off the impression that I'm pro DC. Because there are also DC character that I really don't care for....METAMORPHO? The-Cat? Mr. Terrific? lol The thought of there outfits alone make me laugh.
ironpool007
ironpool007 - 5/12/2011, 1:50 PM
I think Roger Ebert is too set in ways too enjoy many movies coming out today. I mean I don't think Thor was the most amazing CBM out there, but it was still enjoyable. Like I said in my review, Thir is is without his powers too long in this short movie, but the acting was great. Ebert is overrated as far as critics go in my opinion.
Bodwulf
Bodwulf - 5/12/2011, 2:11 PM
@ draven LOL
ThomasRochester
ThomasRochester - 5/12/2011, 2:26 PM
Hiddleston isnt charming?!?!?!
1 2 3
View Recorder