Actual grade: 4/10
(For a full explanation of my grading system, check out this post.)
We are fortunate enough to have been witness to a rise in quality in superhero blockbuster movies over the past decade. Starting with the Spiderman and X-Men franchises and culminating in the zeitgeist-defining Dark Knight, various characters have made the leap from comic book to big screen to both commercial and critical success. It is subsequently even more disappointing when a superhero movie fails to live up to this admittedly very high bar. I must confess that I went into this movie with fairly high expectations, knowing it was from the Marvel universe (that also spawned the terrific Iron Man) and that Thor would be joining said superhero and many others next summer in the highly anticipated Avengers. But I couldn't help but feel disappointed as the credits started rolling.
First of all, IMDB has no less than eight people credited for writing this film (3 for the comic book, 2 for "story," and 3 for the actual screenplay). It is no wonder that with a such a hodgepodge of ideas, inspiration and talent, that the end product would be at the very least uneven. And it is. Whereas Iron Man (another Marvel franchise) found a sharp, pithy sense of humor in which to set its action, the only humor to be found in this film is the "fish out of water" slapstick of watching the Old Timey-speaking Thor try to adjust to life on Earth. Other than that, the film takes itself very seriously (read: too seriously). Thor's character development is practically non-existent. The main journey is supposed to be him overcoming his arrogance and becoming worthy of the hammer, but this "journey" was so abrupt, underdeveloped, and unbelievable that the whole film eventually lost any thrust or power it did have. And Natalie Portman's character, Jane, is so two-dimensional I couldn't believe she agreed to do it. Granted, I haven't read the comic books, but she and her two even more useless sidekicks (Stellan Skarsgard and Kat Dennings) do hardly anything other than stand and gawk on the sidelines at Thor while he raves about his hammer and finally beats some stuff up at the end. We are supposed to believe that after one glimpse at his admittedly admirable abs, Jane has fallen madly in love with Thor. And then, in the final confrontation, we are supposed to believe that it is difficult for Thor to make a choice between Jane and vanquishing evil after sharing one short kiss with her. There was so little chemistry and so little character development between Thor and Jane that I actually felt insulted by how much I was supposed to be suspending my disbelief.
Secondly, there's the acting. Remember when Iron Man came out? It was such a pleasant surprise, because it was so much better than anyone expected it to be. But what made it so great, at least in my opinion, was the acting. Robert Downey Jr and Gwyneth Paltrow had such a believable, zingy rapport that was truly a delight to watch, and Jeff Bridges was a wonderfully hammy villain. In the hands of less capable actors, the same movie would probably have been much less successful. Chris Hemsworth, the newcomer who plays Thor, is nowhere near the level of Robert Downey Jr in terms of talent, charisma, or anything, really. He certainly looks the part of a Norse god, but looks are not enough to carry a whole film. And Natalie Portman is so wasted in this film, as I said before, that even her now-Oscar-worthy talents can't save it. Anthony Hopkins is a breath of fresh air in his meaty but regrettably brief role of Odin.
Finally, and most importantly, there's the source material itself. As I stated before, I've never read the comics, but my biggest problem was with how un-relatable it was. That, in my opinion, is what has made other superhero movies of late so great. Peter Parker, Tony Stark, Bruce Wayne: these are all men, flesh and blood, mortal, complete with flaws. Thor, by definition, is a God, and as such, it is much harder to identify with his struggle. He's gorgeous, heir to a massive, magical kingdom, stronger than any enemy, wields one of the most powerful weapons in the universe, and his biggest problem is overconfidence? I wish that was my problem. Many people are praising Kenneth Branagh for making a superhero movie so Shakespearean, but in my opinion, he didn't need to make an already epic story more epic. The movie needed a director who would tone it down and humanize the story so we as the audience could relate to the hero. For instance Peter Parker, a teenager who develops powers overnight and takes on the responsibility of the safety of all of New York; or Tony Stark, an alcoholic playboy who, after being kidnapped by terrorists, finds himself dying and his only legacy that of war and weapons; or Bruce Wayne, fighting to protect the city he loves only to have its citizens turn against him. All of these movies have found something deep and true to say about the human condition.
Everyone remembers the phrase "With great power comes great responsibility" from Spider-Man or even "You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain" from The Dark Knight. These were the thought-provoking kernels at the heart of those big fancy action movies. Thor contributes very little to this conversation. It is essentially loud, empty action, a feature-length advertisement for The Avengers.
I was hoping for a film on par with Iron Man, and instead got a completely average action flick. If you are a huge comic book/superhero fan, I won't say don't go. But if you were on the fence about seeing this, I would encourage you to save your money. There are plenty more blockbusters coming out in the next few months. If there was one good thing about Thor (besides its art direction, which I must say was beautiful), it was that it set a relatively low bar for the summer -- it can only get better from here, right?
