Thor (2011)

Movie Photo
IMDb Rating
7.0 out of 10 (view IMDb page)

  • 4/5 Star Rating.
(Based on 9 Ratings)
MPAA Rating:
114 Minutes
Action, Adventure, Drama, Fantasy
Kenneth Branagh
Ashley Miller

Weekly Volcano's Review

Rev. Adam McKinney on May 4th, 2011

Favorite This Like this Movie? You can Favorite it on your Profile.

Here is a movie so arbitrary that it defies definition. Were it not for the comic that preceded it, there would be no plausible explanation for Thor's existence.

(Oh, it is my sincere desire that Captain America and Green Lantern are incrementally worse than Thor, so that we may never be subjected to seeing the cluster-f*** that surely will be The Avengers.)

Drawing slight inspiration from Norse mythology, Thor stages the godly kingdom of Asgard as a kind of steam-punk paradise - an unholy mixture of old-world technology and dumbs*** brass-works. Odin (Anthony Hopkins) has long had a truce with the vaguely evil Ice Giants, which his son Thor (Chris Hemsworth) threatens with his brash arrogance. Sensing a dangerous slide toward war, Odin banishes Thor to puny Earth, where Thor is stripped of his powers and exiled as a crazy homeless dude.

Upon arriving on Earth, Thor meets up with Jane and Erik (Natalie Portman and Stellan Skarsgård, respectively), who have been studying strange lights in the sky. When Thor confesses his past, Erik immediately recognizes the story from the tales he heard growing up as a child. Jane, meanwhile, is all hot and bothered because Thor is nothing more than a hunky cipher.

This is all that he will remain.

All sorts of boring things happen, including the rise to power of Thor's brother, Loki. But very little of actual import transpires during the running time of Thor. This is because Thor is just a sad place-holder between now and the opening day of The Avengers. Thor is sprinkled with little hints about Avengers characters, including Jeremy Renner in an unbilled role as Hawkeye, and a totally unnecessary and obnoxious tag after the credits with Samuel L. Jackson as the leader of S.H.I.E.L.D.

The mysterious agency of S.H.I.E.L.D. plays a fairly large role in Thor, and it is never, ever explained. S.H.I.E.L.D. is basically the only bad-guy in this flick, but all hard feelings are eventually resolved between S.H.I.E.L.D. and Thor without any explanation. It just becomes time to tidy things up before the next superhero is trudged onscreen.

I shudder to think fans of comic books or superhero movies or blockbusters in general will be fooled by this lazy, contractually obligated piece of garbage. Besides the ineptitude of the direction (which is executed, inconceivably, by an undoubtedly paycheck-grabbing and out-of-his-element Kenneth Branagh), the 3D effects are nauseating and headache-inducing. My word, how sick I am of this 3D fad. On more than one occasion did I take a brief respite from those glasses only to notice how bright and vivid the screen was without them.

How shameful are we to so willingly participate in this con game? 3D makes things look fake! Not real! Are we morons? When can we make this insanity stop?

Not paying a single cent for Thor would be a healthy start. In the meantime, take a moment to look out your window and contemplate dimensions. Do dioramas come to mind? Because they shouldn't. - One and a half stars

User Reviews of Thor (9)

Weekly Volcano is not responsible for the content of these reviews. Weekly Volcano reserves the right to remove reviews at their discretion.

User Photo

Harrison Fart said on May. 08, 2011 at 10:12pm

As all that Mr. McKinney says about this film is either culled from the Wikipedia page/the trailer or blatant bulls***, I question whether or not he even saw the film.

User Photo

Patrick Alan said on May. 09, 2011 at 9:56am

Meh, Thor -wasn't- good, but it wasn't that bad either. I agree that 3D needs to stop, it was silly in the 50's and again in the 80's and it's silly now...

Oh, and Green Lantern doesn't have anything to do with the Avengers. Different universe altogether (DC v. Marvel).

User Photo

Steve McMullan said on May. 09, 2011 at 12:46pm

I love it. The comment box asks that we "please be relevant and constructive", and this review was neither. Given that in this review he already dished out negative reviews for three movies that haven't even been released yet I, like Harrison Fart, question if he even saw the film. Given his advance negative reviews for 'Captain America', 'Green Lantern' and 'Avengers', I think it's certainly fair to question his journalistic integrity.

User Photo
  • 4/5 Star Rating.

Captain Craig said on May. 09, 2011 at 1:20pm

Dear Weekly Volcano, please find a reviewer who knows something about the material he/she is going to review. I too question if McKinney even saw the film or any of the Marvel films.

Why is SHIELD not explained...because it was explained in Iron Man then elaborated upon in Iron Man 2 and logos appeared in The Incredible Hulk. Thor treats the filmgoer like he has been following along and not some trite child who needs it all explained....again.

When the reviewer then begins to foreshadow their advance hatred for 3 films not yet released or even screened for critics (heck Avengers just started filming 2 weeks ago) then it causes me to question why anyone would want to visit Weekly Volcano for information or opinions. Shame on you WV.

User Photo

Rev. Adam McKinney said on May. 09, 2011 at 2:58pm

"Shame on you WV."

Yeah, it's shameful to have an opinion. I gather an opinion wasn't what you were looking for when you read this review of a shitty film that I most certainly saw and endured. If you would like to have a more in-depth conversation about the film, we can. Although, I'd be quick about it, because all memory of this film seems to be draining from my head as we speak.


User Photo

Rev. Adam McKinney said on May. 09, 2011 at 3:07pm

Oh, and regarding SHIELD: I know what SHIELD is. I am aware of them popping up in other movies (Samuel L. Jackson seems to make the majority of his income from post-credit appearances), but what I said was that it is never explained why Thor would join up with SHIELD when they were nothing but dicks throughout the entirety of "Thor."

He says, and I paraphrase, "Hey, you guys fight on the side of good, like me. I'm with you." Meanwhile, he has no idea what side they fight for, because SHIELD never says anything about what they're doing and why. This is a big plot hole, and I'm sorry for pointing it out to fanboys.

But have you seen the movie? Should I not say any more? Heaven forbid I should treat you like a "trite child."


User Photo

Harrison Fart said on May. 09, 2011 at 3:28pm

Mr. McKinney,

The problem is that this review completely denies any worth that this film actually holds, colored by the fact that you betray your own bias with your comments on Captain America, Green Lantern and the Avengers--films which have yet to be released and, though existing in a larger cultural trend of comic book movies (some of which have been absolutely horrendous, to the sure), deserve fair treatments as films rather than simply fad.

The performances of Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston were, frankly, very well done. The characters--especially that of Loki--were not cardboard cut-outs, but in actuality quite complex.

Though I'm sure Kenneth Branagh made a s*** ton of money, that doesn't nullify the fact that he is a fantastically skilled director.

Finally, you might want to stray away from spending over a quarter of a film review not talking about the film, but instead going on a little tirade over the technology of modern film making. While I agree that 3D is an unnecessary and tasteless gimmick for the most part, your discussion of it here is not befitting the actual job you are supposed to fulfill.

Thor did not start 3D. You do not have to see Thor in 3D.
So why make such a point of talking about 3D here.

You obviously have an opinion on 3D. And on the super hero genre.
But have the journalistic integrity to review a film as just that: a film.

User Photo

Harrison Fart said on May. 09, 2011 at 3:39pm

Sorry. To be fair, you spent over a fifth of the article talking about 3D.

User Photo

Rev. Adam McKinney said on May. 09, 2011 at 3:59pm


I had to review the movie I saw, and the movie I saw was inescapably in 3D. I have no idea what the experience would be like to watch "Thor" in 2D, because it will never happen for me. That ship has sailed.

Who knows? Maybe I would have enjoyed the movie more if it weren't in 3D. But I can't say.

As for "Captain America," "Green Lantern" and "The Avengers," well, how seriously do you generally take my comments? Of course I don't hope those movies will be bad, mostly because I will be forced to see them.

But if you're this mad about me spending a quarter of my review talking about 3D, I'd advise you to certainly avoid Charles Mudede's review over at the Stranger. Steam might shoot out of your ears.


Leave A Review

(This will not be published)