 |
| photo courtesy of marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com |
SPOILER-FREE REVIEW
Thor: Ragnarok made its superhero landing in
theaters all across the nation this weekend. Ragnarok is the third in a trilogy of Thor films and the seventeenth installment in the Marvel Cinematic
Universe, but with an injection of new life from director Taika Waititi, it
feels like anything but a repeat. The previous Thor movies (of which I, by the way, am an ardent defender) haven’t
been the most popular of the Avengers-verse, so Ragnarok takes things in a decidedly different direction. The
result is a superhero film that’s among the boldest, most energetic, and most
thrilling that Marvel has produced—even if its tonal shift is a bit jarring.
In Thor:
Ragnarok, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) faces his most formidable foe yet. After
emerging from her centuries-long banishment, the Goddess of Death, Hela (Cate
Blanchett), exiles Thor and threatens to upheave all order in the nine realms. When
the dust settles, Thor finds himself a prisoner of the Grandmaster (Jeff
Goldblum) who runs the gladiatorial “Contest of Champions” on the planet
Sakaar. Together with his mischievous brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston), fellow
gladiator the Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), and new ally Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson), it’s
up to Thor to escape Sakaar before Hela can unleash her wrath on Asgard.
 |
| photo courtesy of technobuffalo.com |
Ragnarok is a Thor film, for sure—there are spaceships, shiny castles, epic
battle-scapes, and giant monsters—but in many ways it takes its cues more from Guardians of the Galaxy than the Thor franchise. From the first sequence,
the movie establishes a very different tone than we’re used to receiving from a
Thor movie, and that tone permeates
the whole enterprise. Everything from the dialogue (quick, rapid-fire jokes
rather than high-minded diction) to the music (light synth more at home on Stranger Things or Blade Runner 2049) drives the point home: this is a splashier, more
carefree take on the God of Thunder.
It would be easy to say that Ragnarok’s success is totally due to
that new approach, but in truth it’s a combination of several different
factors: a breezy sense of humor, an overqualified cast, smart payoffs, and bold
storytelling. Ragnarok is really,
really funny, thanks in large part to its decision to let Chris Hemsworth show
off his comedic chops. It occasionally veers into downright goofy territory,
but thankfully avoids being quite as silly as Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, favoring a sharp wit over just
shouting “Taserface!” again and again. When all is said and done, it ranks
right up there with the original Guardians
for laugh-out-loud moments.
 |
| photo courtesy of collider.com |
Anthony Hopkins returns as Odin,
proving this time around that he can do comedy alongside his Allfather
grandstanding, and Idris Elba is once again wonderful as Heimdall. New additions Cate Blanchett and Jeff Goldblum (obviously) shine
in their respective roles as Hela and Grandmaster, bringing some Oscar-level
talent to the table. Blanchett, in particular, bears the weight of bringing the
first female Marvel villain to life, and she makes it look effortless. Tessa
Thompson, meanwhile, makes an engaging debut as warrior Valkyrie, but doesn’t
quite manage to pull off the “neo-Han Solo” vibe that the movie’s clearly going
for. Rounding out the cast is Karl Urban as Skurge, and, of course, Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston reprise their roles as the
Gods of Thunder and Mischief, respectively.
 |
| photo courtesy of odeon.co.uk |
One of Ragnarok’s most satisfying developments is its treatment of those
two characters, Thor and Loki. Despite the fact that they actually don’t spend
much screen time together—at least, not much time that’s not occupied by
fighting or escaping or whatever—Thor and Loki’s few quiet scenes with each
other steal the show. It’s in those moments that the audience realizes that
their twisted, thorny relationship has been the most constant and most
important emotional through-line of the series. Step aside, Jane.
But what really sets Ragnarok apart is the audacity of its
storytelling. Where other blockbusters are afraid to make decisions with
lasting consequences, Ragnarok takes
no prisoners, and frankly, it’s refreshing. The filmmakers allow the story to
go where it needs to go, even if it means sacrificing something else down the
line, and that commitment yields impressive fruit: a villain that’s genuinely
frightening and capable, characterization that’s meaningful, stakes that doesn’t
feel arbitrary, action sequences that excite, and a plot that feels fresh (even
if the story’s not exceptionally original).
 |
| photo courtesy of screengeek.net |
Of course, most superhero movies have
their faults, and Ragnarok is no
exception; there are a few notable nitpicks. The greatest casualty, however, is
continuity with the previous Thor
films, which gets sacrificed on the altar of story. Ragnarok feels a little embarrassed of its franchise’s history,
doing its darnedest to forget much of what has transpired there. It’s not that
the movie is disconnected on a storyline level—everything flows logically from
what’s come before—but the movie doesn’t have any interest in doing justice by
its earthbound characters. And if the needs of the story means that the
filmmakers have to retcon elements from the past Thor movies, then by jolly they’ll do it. More on that in the
spoiler section below.
BEWARE: HERE THERE BE SPOILERS
 |
| photo courtesy of slashfilm.com |
Not every Marvel movie has lasting
consequences for the entire Marvel universe, but Ragnarok is not one of those movies. There are so many
ground-shaking moments (the destruction of Mjolnir, the casual death of the
Warriors Three, Hela taking Thor’s eye, and the annihilation of Asgard, for
example) that if it wasn’t for the movie’s unquenchably upbeat spirit, it would
probably be a huge downer. But fortunately, most of those moments serve a
purpose: namely, establishing Hela as a viable threat (not an easy job when her helmet looks like a dying cockroach) and forcing Thor to
realize the potential within himself. It’s a nice, if not incredibly inventive, arc for Thor, which is no surprise since Marvel has used the same basic “take
away the thing that makes him a hero and see if he can still be a hero” arc for
its two other threequels, Iron Man 3 and
Captain America: Civil War. But who’s
keeping track?
There are other enjoyable call-backs to
previous Marvel movies, including two prominent echoes for the movie’s card-carrying
Avenger characters, Thor and Hulk. For Thor, the sacrifice of Asgard mirrors
the sacrifice of the Bifrost at the end of the first Thor, another difficult decision made to save a race of innocents
from complete destruction (although then it was the frost giants, not the
Asgardians).
 |
| photo courtesy of slashfilm.com |
For Hulk, Ragnarok reaches all the way back to the frequently forgotten The Incredible Hulk, the finale of which
sees Banner (Edward Norton, back in 2008) drop out of a plane because he knows
he’s the only one who can stop the Abomination (Tim Roth). At that moment, his
love interest Betty Ross (alas, we barely knew ye!) protests, making the point
that Banner isn’t even sure he’ll change into Hulk form when he hits the
ground. In that movie, of course, Banner does change in time to save the day,
but in Ragnarok we see the
alternative played out in comedic form when Banner makes a similar decision,
this time landing on the Bifrost like a rag doll.
Now, as to what Ragnarok retcons from
previous Thor films, let me first
issue a disclaimer: Ragnarok doesn’t
cut things out willy-nilly; it makes room for plenty of enjoyable additions
like Doctor Strange’s quirky cameo, Matt Damon’s random appearance, and plenty
of science fiction hijinks. But it doesn’t sting any less when Jane Foster
(Natalie Portman), the romantic interest and undeniably major influence in the
first two Thor movies, gets dismissed with a throwaway, blink-and-you-miss-it quip.
I know Jane probably wasn’t a particularly beloved character, and their romance
wasn’t exactly a romance for the ages (Thor does, after all, keep leaving her
to do his Avenger-ing), but she still deserves something more. This is the
second time Marvel has tried to do away with a major relationship off-screen
(Tony Stark and Gwyneth Paltrow’s Pepper in Civil
War), and it’s lame, lame, lame.
 |
| photo courtesy of slashfilm.com |
Jane
Foster’s not the only one to get the axe. The movie retcons Odin in a way
similar to Yondu’s sudden shift from captor to father figure in Guardians Vol 2. Sure, Odin’s always
been wise, and sure, maybe staring death in the face has given him a change of
heart, but it’s hard to forget that in Thor:
The Dark World, he was willing to
protect Asgard if it meant spilling every drop of Asgardian blood—a far, far
cry from “Asgard is a people, not a place.” (Interestingly, nuancing Odin’s
position as wise old sage is one of the few themes from The Dark World that does
carry over into Ragnarok.) Thor accepting
his role as King of Asgard is yet another Ragnarok
story beat that, while understandable in context, undoes the (admittedly
scarce) character development from The Dark
World.
BEWARE: HERE THERE BE SPECULATION
 |
| photo courtesy of slashfilm.com |
So if Ragnarok makes it clear that the past is in the past—for better or
worse—what lies in store for the future? Piecing together information from the
post-credits scene and the Comic Con Avengers:
Infinity War trailer, Thor doesn’t look like he’ll be sitting on Asgard’s
makeshift throne for long; Infinity War
will see Thor (and apparently only Thor) make contact with the Guardians of the
Galaxy.
Watch Thor: Ragnarok's trailer here.
 |
| photo courtesy of technoarticle.com |
No comments:
Post a Comment