Thoughts on "Thor"

I know I'm behind the times, but I only just recently got to see Thor (first movie in 3D). The following are random thoughts, not a well-thought-out movie review... Proceed with caution. ;-)

I really had no inclination to see Thor until I heard that it was another Kenneth Branagh/Patrick Doyle director/soundtrack team.

My original indifference was mostly because I'm not a huge superhero/Marvel fan and for some reason it just really seemed like Chris Hemsworth should be Sean Bean...and he wasn't. (Don't try to make sense of that one.)

I walked into the theater with a lot of recommendations but not much idea of who as acting or what the story was all about.

It was a good movie.

Thor was a refreshing character...far from perfect but not blatantly retarded (not the typical "bad boy"). I thought Hemsworth acted wonderfully. Thor was a sympathetic, changing, and mildly complex character who acted realistically (even with the god-factor in there). He turned into a true hero...the best produced by hollywood in a long time.

By the end of the movie, I forgave him for not being Sean Bean, but that was about as far as it got.

Anthony Hopkins was superb (duh). His character (the king) kept much of the movie from becoming cliche.

The whole cast is very typical of a Kenneth Branagh film and meshes together beautifully.

There were moments of goofiness, predictability, or complete unbelievability, but over all, the movie was a fun and clean 114 minutes.

If you know me...you might know what is coming next...

Depending on how you look at it, plot spoilers may lie ahead. Also...let me just say that Tom Hiddleston looks a lot different with straight, black hair.

From the first moment you see Loki you know that they are going to make him have all of these unresolved issues and that he's going to turn against Thor. He's the good boy who will turn bad, while the bad boy will turn good. I was literally hoping beyond hope that they would have just let him be an amazing brother and son. I loved him from the beginning and I knew they would do this to him. Come on. It's so overused.

He could have been amazing.

I want to see a movie where there is simply a supporting character like Loki could have been. I want to see a movie where the child can truly accept the fact that his parents love him for who he is, no matter where he came from. I want to see a movie where a guy can be from the enemy race and still be a good guy.

There were just so many things about the whole situation that I didn't like. It really put a damper on the movie.

Please don't sacrifice a potentially awesome character just to come up with a plot element. There are other more original options.

And of course he's not dead. Who dies in these type of movies?

I know it's all based of a comic book and I'm going to refrain from blaming people like Kenneth Branagh, but it makes me want to rewrite the story.

Having said all that, I did think it was the best superhero movie to perhaps ever come out (maybe not my favorite, but the best).

They did a great job keeping it interesting, crazy, and clean. Thor was very much the lion and Loki was very much the serpent, but at the same time the characters were more morally complex. It had an interesting focus on the purpose and place of war and actions of individual characters.

At first I thought they were going to do a lot with the whole "god" thing, but they actually go out of their way to explain him as not being a god at all (although he still is the god of thunder...not sure how that works). Certainly the most unobjectionable movie of its type.

Really enjoyed it. I'll just have to make up an alternate reality for the whole Loki aspect.

Visit my sister's blog to see her take.

I would enjoy hearing your thoughts.

Thanks for reading,
Miss Pickwickian

A Character - Mr. Edward Carter

I've never been able to fully emerge myself in Elizabeth Gaskell's writing, but I love her stories and characters. I think they excel when adapted to the screen. The jerkiness and narrow description (or just weirdness) of characters smooths out on film.

I'm not saying I don't like Gaskell's work, I really do, but I just don't love her style.

She has given me some of my true all time favorite characters. Jessie Brown, Mrs. Thorton, Miss Matty, Molly Gibson, Nicholas Higgins, Lady Ludlow, Miss Galindo, and others are immortal in my imagination.

Two of my all time favorite heroes are her creations. The amazing Mr. John Thorton and Mr. Edward Carter. Everyone knows how awesome Mr. Thorton is, so this post is for Mr. Carter. :-)

What makes Gaskell's characters and stories stick out to me is their complexity. You can love a gazillion characters and be siding with them all, even though they are all siding against each other.

They might struggle with reassurance, but they are acting on what they believe to be right. They are taking a stand for something. They deal with real life problems and it's hard.

Mr. Carter is compassionate but tough.
He's loyal (even to crabby people:-).
He'll tell the truth even when it costs him.
He's willing to give great personal sacrifice to help others, even if he can't trust them or knows there will be no sort of return.

Basically, he's so awesome, yet believable.

With Lady Ludlow.
(One of the aforesaid difficult people to work with.)

With Harry.
This part is so sad.

With one of the pretties, sweetest bouquets of all time.

With Miss Galindo.

With Miss Galindo again...
Just because that is where he should be.

With Captain Brown.
No! Turn around!

With Miss Galindo.
Writing his will. One of the sweetest, saddest scenes of all time.

With Harry, Miss Matty, Deborah, and Miss Pole.

There is a relatively nice "tribute video" you can see here. I would have posted it, but I thought the end seemed sort of lame and trivial given the caliber of the character.

If you haven't explored Elizabeth Gaskell, you should! Wives and Daughters, Cranford, Return to Cranford, and North and South are all amazing period dramas.

I always enjoy trying to think through why I like a character so much or why someone is just plain awesome. I consider it a great study for my writing. ;-)

Thanks for reading,
Miss Pickwickian

Iron Man 2

So, two Saturdays ago we were able to go see Iron Man 2. We would have seen it sooner, but a certain sibling was getting married. ;-)

I must say I was pleasantly surprised. I had only seen one trailer sometime ago and walked into it knowing little about the plot (although my sister had thoroughly checked it out). Needless to say, I enjoyed it, which is why I was disappointed with World's article that came yesterday. You can read the first portion of it here http://www.worldmag.com/articles/16702 . Here is a quote from part of her conclusion-

"The action scenes are fun when they get going, and the film (rated PG-13) is, for the most part clean. (A few double entendres and occasional swear words are the worst of it.)
The biggest flaw, however, is the lack of moral core that should propel a superhero movie. The bad guys have no grand, dark schemes other than to destroy Stark and sell weapons to the military. The greatest moral outrage seems to be over the government't theft of Stark's Iron Man suit. Paten infringement is certainly a problem, but it's hardly a superhero issue."

Quoted from Hero without a Cause by Rebecca Cusey

I guess I was so disappointed because I normally agree with World's movie reviews.
I can't agree with this one. The last two sentences are completely false...

First, to be unsatisfied with out much action? Gack....There seemed plenty! But my bigger bone to pick is on the moral issues.
I found Iron Man 2 refreshing. Although there was plenty of the impossible, the issues the characters struggled with seemed to relate more to everyone's lives. Stark is believable as a plain, sinful, but lovable human. Stark has trouble with his friendships and relationships, but everyone acts rationally and believably.

I am not a superhero movie person. I can't stand the Spider Man movies. Seriously, MJ ruins them for me. She is irrational. I just can't like her. Batman takes itself a little to seriously and the girl is almost equal unlikable, but I enjoy the movie more. I couldn't connect with Superman at all.

I think Iron Man leaves Superhero stereotypes behind. First, I think it does not take itself so seriously, but it does taken human nature and character seriously.
I can watch it without saying "oh brother" at sand man, green goblins cackle, or Peter making dramatic choices. (Sorry, not trying to smash Spider Man. I think it is an excellent film for those who love comic type superhero films. It's well done, and I love Tobey Maguires performances.)

Stark's choices and pain are real but it's not over dramatized. Everything may be abnormal, but the people are normal.

I think it's interesting that the director of the film, Jon Favreau, casts himself as Happy Hogan. To me, this was a small picture of the film. Happy is really not so bright, but good. He is a simple average guy, and he's a character we can all relate too. The director plays the role of a comparatively insignificance character, but a character that adds to the group of believable, lovable characters.

All the characters in the movie make mistakes. All the actors play flawed people. In essence, no one is set up to be a superhero.

I was impressed by the way friendship was portrayed. Stark's real friends do plenty of things that make him mad. Plenty of things that are hard for his friends to do, but certainly the best for Stark and everyone else involved. I found this true portrayal of friendship extremely refreshing.

All good stories can not help imitating the greatest story, but I found some of the themes in Iron Man 2 particularly interesting.
At one point Ivan Vanko says, "If you make God bleed people, people will cease to believe in him." This actually made me LOL. This guy needs to read his Bible. I guess bad guys don't change much....

The movie is mostly clean. The opening scene scene earns it's PG 13 rating with some disturbingly immodest dancing, but as a whole it's considerably cleaner then the original Iron Man.

I guess this is more of a rant/ramble/musing then a review. I haven't watched Iron Man for awhile so I can't say if it's better then it's sequel. I think it is more cohesive, but not so satisfying. I thought the ending of Iron Man 2 was amazing for a superhero movie! It was actually a satisfactory ending! As a whole, though, it wasn't as cohesive...a little more choppy and rambling.

Basically I don't think it's perfect, but I do recommend it. It is certainly creates an interesting conversation. So why couldn't I have just said that to begin with?

Thanks for reading. If you got to the end, you are a very determined (or very bored) person.
Miss Pickwickian