The Hulk, sporting a new haircut and holding a conversation is truly awesome, very refreshing. His CGI also looks more enhanced than we have seen before; thumbs up to that. I could be wrong but Hulk also looks less thickset, less stocky, a little leaner and a bit more GQ, its as though he is getting with the times, nice, very nice. A sexier Hulk huh? The audience certainly didn't see this coming. Very clever, I can see the ladies liking this decision by Marvel. There was a change in tone from the first trailer from being a little bit more laid back to being tighter; like the tightening of a loose guitar string to give off the right note. If the movie's tone is edited toward the second trailer the movie will be more enjoyable.
Director Taika Waititi seems to be taking this one in the right direction. Its great to see diversity in the cast. Tessa Thomson is seen making all the right moves as Valkyrie. Thor has a large and loyal fan base, but for this movie to be a success it has to be tight. Weaknesses in previous Thor movies have stemmed from a tendency of turning Thor into a stand-up, joke telling comedian of sorts; a role that ideally should be Loki's. I've identified this problem before in Trendz, and its sad to see this mistake continue unperturbed. Yes its funny, but why is Thor the teller of lamish jokes? If Thor must tell jokes it should ideally not be because he's intentionally trying to be funny. For instance when he jokes with Bruce Banner (portrayed by Mark Rufallo) about defeating Hulk in the arena it should not appear as though he is joking, i.e. it should ideally be that he really can't stomach the fact that he was knocked about and is therefore embellishing the story. It should be funny to the audience but not to Thor himself. The way Thor bends the truth with a straight face about his encounters with Hulk is very useful for writers developing a narrative; its a useful quirk or character flaw in that if you really know Thor and he says something you know you should double check the facts or he might be having one over you. Thor pre-emptly scuttles the humour again in the part where he refers to Hulk as a friend from work. It would be funnier if Loki shouted this out and Thor turned to him with a serious expression of what the...are you talking about, this green monster is going to try to smash me into the ground. In this switch Loki is delivering the humour, Thor is the target and Hulk completes the scene. The laughter or humour is left to come from the audience. The three point methodology works. Writers can use this method over and over simply tweaking it each time. The humour should indirectly circle Thor rather than come verbally directly from him. The same applies to when he is sitting with Hulk, who refers to him as water. Thor counters that they are both fire. But he does this with a slight smile toward the end that should not be in the scene [as though he knows the gist or humour in what he saying]. This is wrong. Why? Because its unnecessarily out of character and the method of delivery for interaction between two important characters is incorrectly presented in the narrative. Thor should be stoic about what he is saying there, the laughter should come from the audience not from him. Guardians of the Galaxy (GG) 2 makes this same mistake. Yes, GG1 was refreshingly funny but this seems to have warped or skewed the method on how to build GG2. GG2 attempts to turn nearly every character into a comedian and every other scene into something comedic therefore the effectiveness of the narrative collapses on itself. The movie has great scenery, superb actors but loses the plot by putting all the characters into a comedic blender, consequently there is a significant drop in quality in the second installment of this franchise.
As a director taking over the next installment of a successful movie treat being pushed to top what was done successfully in the last movie with suspicion. Dole it out in the same quantity the audience enjoyed it at, its now your baseline. Remember if the audience liked the coffee or tea with two sugars, give it to them with two sugars in the sequel; don't put in three heap spoons like an amateur; instead the next time around add a little cinnamon in the tea and a little creamer in the coffee, but maintain two sugars. In other words absolutely look for a new angle to introduce that will captivate the audience. Don't allow yourself to fall into the trap of amplification. A very common and persisting problem in sequels today is the tendency to take an aspect of an earlier movie be it interesting story lines, explosions, romance, humour, action, special effects and so on that resonated with the audience, then go overboard trying to over amplify this in the sequel cramming it down the audience's throat until its gagging. This problem turns movies from even seasoned directors today into glossy big budget amateur hour renditions of earlier blockbusters. Its important never to lose balance. If something resonated with the audience stop constantly trying to go bigger and over the top, don't gorge on it in the sequel, instead look for that Zen feeling of self control and maintain the previous flow whilst venturing into other aspects of the movie to sustain interest through creativity or intrigue rather than over amplification. Don't be an amateur. Take a yoga lesson or a meditation class, calm down and resist the urge go bigger and badder, instead maintain the chill; but explore, go deeper, go smoother and tighter. This is a craft, methodology in the narrative is real its not something fleeting, the foundation is no different from algebra; an x or y in the wrong place doesn't yield the desired result. Characters have individual roles and personalities, they can't just be put in a blender. Making everyone in a movie like this comedic is like putting both tennis players at Wimbledon on the same side of the court with no one on the other end and expecting the audience to enjoy watching them play. The plot is lost; the players need to be on different ends of the court to smack the ball back and forth for the audience to have something interesting to view, similarly personalities are tentpoles that hold the narrative up by effectively playing or feeding off one another.
When Thor says they are both fire he should be pensive and frown, be seen by the audience to be at pains to be equal in strength to the Hulk and see nothing amusing about what is being said, that humour should be left to the audience otherwise the movie goes off key, like parody or a bad comedy that some people will find amusing but others will see as lame leading to potentially negative reviews. Thor should not introspectively view himself as being amusing, but this is the tone he gives off, even when narrating events during the teasers he sounds bemused; which is incorrigible really. Consequently the audience is being forced not to take him seriously. It would make sense if the bemused narrative were said in that way by Loki, the trickster making light of Thor's dire predicament. Thor's situation is dire, the impossible has happened: Hela has destroyed Mjolnir, his most prized possession.Thor has also been captured like an animal in a net, this is very serious, Thor is in a very bad place. Only Loki who is always looking for a laugh would be bemused by Thor's terrible plight. Thor has never been this down in the dumps. Put yourself in his shoes, realistically he should be in very, very low spirits....and the audience should be right down there in empathy with him...sooooo...why is he narrating what's happened to him as though he is bemused? The heaviness of the narrative is killed off instead of being expertly milked like a cash cow because the audience doesn't get a smidgen of a chance to feel his deep anguish. This is what happens when the characters are not allocated the right personalities, it affects the methodology applied in writing the scenarios. If the personalities were properly allocated this would never have happened and the humour, anguish, action and narrative would flow like a natural-born-blockbuster. Its not too late to get this right in the MCU. I'm not being negative, I'm trying to help...this is what perspective looks like.
This problem of improper delivery of humour or how to associate it with Thor's character weakened previous Thor movies. Its as though the lines between Thor and Loki's personalities and roles are being crossed in the MCU, creating a method that is difficult to sell to an audience. The persona we have seen thus far tries to portray Thor as a laid back goofy god of thunder who doesn't take himself too seriously. This is the wrong combination. It makes it difficult for the audience to appreciate how to relate to him. Ideally he should be laid back, but take himself seriously, this is the correct persona for Thor. Laid back or down to earth for him is cutting his hair, wearing earth clothes, letting his friends play around with trying to lift Mjolnir, unashamedly cutting a rug with them on the dance floor and having a beer not trying to play comedian. In the MCU lore Thor is the guy who's looks and being the god of thunder with the intimidating hammer make him seem unapproachable. This is good, because it can be counter balanced when he is "off-duty" by his being the cool guy willing to hang out with anyone rich or poor, share a beer, date a girl cause he likes her not necessarily because she's skinny or big, cute or average because he has a big heart. He's the hero who'll make friends with anyone regardless of their social status, who likes any genre of music. Being laid back in this way is what gains him respectability with the audience. Future Thor movies have to bring out this people person aspect of Thor as a sharp contrast with off-duty and on on-duty Thor. Thor's openness to people is real and proven in that he even befriends the Hulk, something many mortals would have thought impossible. Thor doesn't let differences get in the way of being there for someone. HIs friendship with the Hulk, their persistent rivalry and attempt to outdo one another resonates very well with the cinema going audience and can be used by writers who craft these characters to create blockbusters for very long time to come. Building these aspects of Thor and teaming him up with the Hulk makes good business sense for Marvel. Allow Loki to personify the comedian, the guy with the jokes for every situation. Remember in Norse mythology Loki is after all the trickster god. He's the funny man and writers in the MCU need to get this right a.s.a.p and not mix up his role as the joker with Thor. Already Tom Hiddleston's brand of delivery makes him the best point man for writers in the MCU to write this kind humour around. This places the trio of Loki, Thor and Hulk in personas that are positioned to move like clockwork and make sense in any scenario the writers have them face. Their interaction will consequently deliver consistent hits for Marvel.
Trust me, being a comedian or a funny man which was intended for Loki doesn't work for Thor, however, being the butt of a joke every now and again at his expense does because Thor is too cool and laid back to be affected by any kind of humour directed at him. This chemistry would work with the audience and bring Marvel the blockbusters it needs. Its really just tweaking or a careful re-positioning of the part ably brought to life by Chris Hemsworth. Its a tone thing. To hit all the right notes adjustments need to be made to Thor's persona, and how he relates to the people and events unfolding around him. You can prove this is right quite easily. Go on Youtube and study reactions to the Thor: Ragnarok trailers. Now watch to see how many people actually respond with laughter when Thor tells a joke e.g. - he's a friend from work, defeated him easily, Thor like water Hulk like fire etc. The fact that not everyone responds to this humour, that some people burst out laughing and others simply watch is a significant red flag. If the trailers can clearly demonstrate that the humour is not hitting all the notes its a definitive indication that something needs to be done differently. To ignore it is suicidal. Tweak, tweak, tweak this...get it right or its inevitable that in the long run you will lose Thor as a significant hero in the MCU.
What to do with Hela's horns/antlers. It would be interesting if the horns could flow back like dreads and move like natural hair when she is relaxed. They would then begin to rise into place when she enters battle mode so to speak.
The part where Hela asks what Thor is the god of and he does a perfect superhero landing then comes up sprouting lightning is the business, excellent cinematic delivery.
The background music was superb. Here we go!
Looking forward to November 2017!
No comments:
Post a Comment