Advertisement

Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

This is the main board on The Outhouse, where Outhousers talk about everything. No topics are off limits, and it doesn't have to be about comics. All the topics from the other boards also show up in The Asylum, so you never have to leave1

Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Logged in users see WAY LESS ADS, so why not register? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*

*Membership spots not really limited!

outsider
User avatar
Outhouse Drafter
 
Posts: 33563
Likes: 868 posts
Liked in: 476 posts
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 12:35 pm
Title: Absent
Formerly: Daddy Longlegs, Max Power


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby outsider » Mon Nov 11, 2013 5:27 pm

Chessack, I appreciate what you're saying (and agree, for the most part, even though we would have gotten a 4+ hour movie, lol), but you're talking about characterization/plot. By aesthetic, I was referencing the visual/design aspects, not the story or characters themselves.
(For instance, Simonson gave the characters costumes more metal & fabric, whereas the JMS/Copiel redux gave us a lot more Game of Thrones/RenFair-esque leather & fur.)
-

Advertisement

T-Roy Space Cowboy
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 26837
Likes: 700 posts
Liked in: 342 posts
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 7:40 pm
Location: Georgia
Title: I'm a Paul Heyman Guy.
Formerly: T-Rex


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby T-Roy Space Cowboy » Mon Nov 11, 2013 6:05 pm

Saw it again today, enjoyed it even more the second time!
Image

The Beast
User avatar
cheese
 
Posts: 2160
Likes: 217 posts
Liked in: 95 posts
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 6:56 pm
Location: The True North, strong and free!
Title: Chronic MasterDebator


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby The Beast » Mon Nov 11, 2013 6:32 pm

outsider wrote:Are we cross?
The Avengers had just as many jokey-jokes, so it seems like that reviewer had an axe to grind.

Has TDW had many negative reviews? I've heard mostly good buzz.

misac wrote:
Meh to that reviewer. I guess we’re looking for different things in movies. I look forward to the fun moments almost as much as the action. With the Marvel movies and Star Trek.

Grayson wrote:
Evidently Kyle Smith couldn't be bothered to actually pay attention to the movie that he was supposedly reviewing. :smt102

Jack Burton wrote:
He writes for the New York Post.

To me that in and of itself makes his opinion invalid.


LMAO, you guys are hilarious!

TDW is getting slightly worse reviews than MoS and it's making less money:

-54 on metacritic compared to MoS' 55.
-66% on RT but the average is 6.2/10 which is exactly the same as MoS. If you only look at top critics, TDW has 38% compared to MoS' 53% among top critics.

Now it is all about preference and that's fine and dandy that some of you prefer superhero movies that don't take themselves seriously, nothing wrong with that. The point I was making was there's no fucking way that WB is looking at TDW's performance and thinking that they need adopt that shit for Batman VS Superman.

For months on end many of you have assumed MoS was flawed for not being more "fun" and TDW demonstrated that more "fun" =/= better reception among the general public.

Grayson
User avatar
Outhouse Drafter
 
Posts: 8242
Likes: 437 posts
Liked in: 789 posts
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 9:34 am
Location: The Darkest Timeline
Title: The Intersect
Formerly: Sakie


Online


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby Grayson » Mon Nov 11, 2013 6:48 pm

The Beast wrote:LMAO, you guys are hilarious!

TDW is getting slightly worse reviews than MoS and it's making less money:

-54 on metacritic compared to MoS' 55.
-66% on RT but the average is 6.2/10 which is exactly the same as MoS. If you only look at top critics, TDW has 38% compared to MoS' 53% among top critics.

Now it is all about preference and that's fine and dandy that some of you prefer superhero movies that don't take themselves seriously, nothing wrong with that. The point I was making was there's no fucking way that WB is looking at TDW's performance and thinking that they need adopt that shit for Batman VS Superman.

For months on end many of you have assumed MoS was flawed for not being more "fun" and TDW demonstrated that more "fun" =/= better reception among the general public.


I was simply pointing out that Kyle Smith's review was either intentionally misleading or unfortunately misinformed. Whether the movie is better, worse, or equal to a completely different film that's not a part of the shared universe this film exists in, isn't really my concern.
ImageImageImage

Jack Burton
User avatar
biny little tird
 
Posts: 12216
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 36 posts
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:20 pm
Location: Braintree, MA


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby Jack Burton » Mon Nov 11, 2013 6:58 pm

The Beast wrote:



LMAO, you guys are hilarious!

TDW is getting slightly worse reviews than MoS and it's making less money:

-54 on metacritic compared to MoS' 55.
-66% on RT but the average is 6.2/10 which is exactly the same as MoS. If you only look at top critics, TDW has 38% compared to MoS' 53% among top critics.

Now it is all about preference and that's fine and dandy that some of you prefer superhero movies that don't take themselves seriously, nothing wrong with that. The point I was making was there's no fucking way that WB is looking at TDW's performance and thinking that they need adopt that shit for Batman VS Superman.

For months on end many of you have assumed MoS was flawed for not being more "fun" and TDW demonstrated that more "fun" =/= better reception among the general public.


Actually dude I just really hate the New York Post. It's a piece of shit newspaper and I tend not to give anyone who works for it any credit.

That's it. I don't really care if TDW does better or worse than MOS.

Chris
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 41347
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 39 posts
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:10 pm
Title: Stuff Writer
Formerly: Chris


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby Chris » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:00 pm

The Beast wrote:



LMAO, you guys are hilarious!

TDW is getting slightly worse reviews than MoS and it's making less money:

-54 on metacritic compared to MoS' 55.
-66% on RT but the average is 6.2/10 which is exactly the same as MoS. If you only look at top critics, TDW has 38% compared to MoS' 53% among top critics.

Now it is all about preference and that's fine and dandy that some of you prefer superhero movies that don't take themselves seriously, nothing wrong with that. The point I was making was there's no fucking way that WB is looking at TDW's performance and thinking that they need adopt that shit for Batman VS Superman.

For months on end many of you have assumed MoS was flawed for not being more "fun" and TDW demonstrated that more "fun" =/= better reception among the general public.


I think your comparison is flawed in terms of money. Thor is not a big character, even now post-Avengers. Comparing him to fucking Superman is ridiculous.

You should instead compare it to Thor 1.

Opening weekend for TDW was 30% higher than Thor 1. Thor is never going to make Superman money. It's not even going to make Iron Man money right off the bat, although at this rate it's feasible that it could come close to Iron Man numbers worldwide. It's already at $327M and it just came out here this weekend.

Moreover, I think the Iron Man movies and Avengers both throw this notion that superhero movies need to be dark and super serious out the window.
Image

The Beast
User avatar
cheese
 
Posts: 2160
Likes: 217 posts
Liked in: 95 posts
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 6:56 pm
Location: The True North, strong and free!
Title: Chronic MasterDebator


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby The Beast » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:04 pm

Grayson wrote:
I was simply pointing out that Kyle Smith's review was either intentionally misleading or unfortunately misinformed.


Well, based on the consensus of top critics who overwhelmingly voted "rotten", I'd say your point lacks merit.

Whether the movie is better, worse, or equal to a completely different film that's not a part of the shared universe this film exists in, isn't really my concern.


Perhaps not but to others who were hoping WB/DC would liven things up in the future to follow Marvel's lead, it was their cornflakes I was pissing in. I probably shouldn't but it's nice to see after putting up with all the bellyaching over MoS. ;)

Rockman
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 27629
Likes: 118 posts
Liked in: 377 posts
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:25 pm
Formerly: AMS


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby Rockman » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:14 pm

Lets be real here there is no way that Iron Man should be doing better than a superman movie, but so far all three entries into that franchise have made more money that Man of Steel. :lol:

The most recognizable super hero of the planet is getting trounced by B-lister tony stark, but I guess it's okay because it was grim and gritty.

The Beast
User avatar
cheese
 
Posts: 2160
Likes: 217 posts
Liked in: 95 posts
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 6:56 pm
Location: The True North, strong and free!
Title: Chronic MasterDebator


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby The Beast » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:16 pm

Chris wrote:
I think your comparison is flawed in terms of money. Thor is not a big character, even now post-Avengers. Comparing him to fucking Superman is ridiculous.

You should instead compare it to Thor 1.

Opening weekend for TDW was 30% higher than Thor 1. Thor is never going to make Superman money. It's not even going to make Iron Man money right off the bat, although at this rate it's feasible that it could come close to Iron Man numbers worldwide. It's already at $327M and it just came out here this weekend.

Moreover, I think the Iron Man movies and Avengers both throw this notion that superhero movies need to be dark and super serious out the window.


Do you guys understand that all I'm pointing out is that superhero movies don't need to be light hearted and silly?

I'm not advocating for "dark and super serious" but I'm not against it in principal. Are you guys saying a super hero movie can't take itself seriously?

Personally, I hope both studios keep their tones distinct. It's all flavours of ice cream to me and the more variety the better.

Rockman
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 27629
Likes: 118 posts
Liked in: 377 posts
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:25 pm
Formerly: AMS


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby Rockman » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:17 pm

The tone should fit the property.

Chris
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 41347
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 39 posts
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:10 pm
Title: Stuff Writer
Formerly: Chris


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby Chris » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:18 pm

Rockman wrote:Lets be real here there is no way that Iron Man should be doing better than a superman movie, but so far all three entries into that franchise have made more money that Man of Steel. :lol:

The most recognizable super hero of the planet is getting trounced by B-lister tony stark, but I guess it's okay because it was grim and gritty.


Iron Man did not make more than MoS even adjusting for inflation.

The other two though, you're correct about.
Image

Rockman
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 27629
Likes: 118 posts
Liked in: 377 posts
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:25 pm
Formerly: AMS


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby Rockman » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:19 pm

Chris wrote:
Iron Man did not make more than MoS even adjusting for inflation.

The other two though, you're correct about.


it did domestically.

Globally you're correct.

Chris
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 41347
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 39 posts
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:10 pm
Title: Stuff Writer
Formerly: Chris


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby Chris » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:20 pm

Rockman wrote:
it did domestically.

Globally you're correct.


It's not like they don't count the international sales. They don't use monopoly money overseas, even if it does look like it. :P
Image

syxxpakk
User avatar
Wrasslin' Fan
 
Posts: 12625
Likes: 49 posts
Liked in: 111 posts
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:13 pm
Title: The Wrasslin' Fan


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby syxxpakk » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:24 pm

Having seen and immensely enjoyed both (TDW and MOS), Thor is my current fave.
Image

When you're as good as Chael, you can only call out people worse than you.


@syxxpakk on the Twitter.

The Beast
User avatar
cheese
 
Posts: 2160
Likes: 217 posts
Liked in: 95 posts
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 6:56 pm
Location: The True North, strong and free!
Title: Chronic MasterDebator


Re: Thor: The Dark World (Spoliers)

Postby The Beast » Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:26 pm

Rockman wrote:Lets be real here there is no way that Iron Man should be doing better than a superman movie, but so far all three entries into that franchise have made more money that Man of Steel. :lol:

The most recognizable super hero of the planet is getting trounced by B-lister tony stark, but I guess it's okay because it was grim and gritty.


How is 585 > 662?

Let's be honest here and give credit where credit is due, RDJr is the real star and his movies deserve every penny.

leave a comment with facebook

PreviousNext

Return to The Asylum



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 61 guests

Advertisement