Thor: Ragnarok Review

After spending most of last month focusing on my Halloween reviews while ignoring most of the theatrically released films (sorry about that), it's back to the theater and there's no better way to reinvigorate my theater going frenzy than with another trip into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I don't know if you've noticed, but I've been very good at NOT being a Marvel fanboy. The novelty of seeing a superhero on screen has worn off quite some time ago and now I'm extra picky about what I want and what I expect from these superhero movies. And I certainly have zero allegiance either Marvel or DC. The idea that you can only be a fan of one of the studio's movies is hogwash. I'm a fan of the genre as a whole and I will give equal praise to any film, regardless of studio, so long as they give me a good product. And as was evidenced this year with my reviews of "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2" and "Wonder Woman," I'm not afraid to hate on Marvel for sub-par material or praise the heck out of DC for giving us something just as good, if not better, than anything Marvel has done previously. Even Fox with their "X-Men" universe has stepped up to the plate and given us a movie in "Logan" that's better than any superhero movie since "The Dark Knight."

I feel I say something to that effect every time I review a superhero film, but it's always worth repeating, especially as a precursor to this review so that you know that I'm not just blindly praising "Thor: Ragnarok" because it's another Marvel movie and everyone else has praised it. I legitimately think this is a top tier Marvel movie and I'll do my best to explain why without giving any spoilers. While it's not on the level of "Logan" or "Wonder Woman," this is the best of the three MCU films this year, the other two being "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2" and "Spider-Man: Homecoming." In terms of the Phase III films from the MCU, this is on pretty equal grounds with "Doctor Strange" and "Captain America: Civil War" for the top of Phase III. And of course it almost goes without saying that this is the best of the three "Thor" films. I do think the first "Thor" is a very underrated, underappreciated film. It was a hilarious fish-out-of-water story with two great character arcs for Thor and Loki, even though the romance was forced and there wasn't much of a villain to fight. "Thor: The Dark World," though, was a Loki away from being the MCU's first outright bad movie. Coming off that, I wasn't necessarily ecstatic about diving into the Thor universe again.

Then the trailers dropped. What in the heck did they just turn the "Thor" franchise into? This looked like a very colorful combination of "Guardians of the Galaxy" meets "Gladiator" with Thor characters thrown in. And a Hulk. I didn't know if I was excited or nervous at that point. But I was certainly intrigued. Then the reviews came out like three weeks ago and the movie was deemed as the funniest movie since "Guardians of the Galaxy" that was perhaps the most fun people have had in a superhero film in some time, resulting in a Rotten Tomatoes score that currently stands at a 93 percent, which is a notch below "Iron Man" at 94 percent, the highest score that an MCU movie has been given, and just ahead of six other MCU films that have ranged between 89 percent and 92 percent. We'll see where it ends up landing once all the reviews have trickled in, but with over 200 counted at this point, it's guaranteed to remain right there in the top tier of MCU films on Rotten Tomatoes. That definitely had my attention. Thus I went in ready for a really good time at the theaters. And a good time at the theater is exactly what I was treated to. But in addition to laughing a lot and having a fun time, I was also pleasantly surprised at how good of a story I was given. This a lot more than just a really funny movie.

In Norse mythology, Ragnarok essentially refers to the end of the world. And that's exactly what this movie is about. When we got that tease in "Avengers: Age of Ultron" and subsequently learned that the title of this movie would be "Thor: Ragnarok," I was expecting a dark, ominous end of the world story. And I don't know if I was excited for that. Especially since "Thor: The Dark World" tried to be dark, but was too chicken to go all the way and forced a bunch of comedy into it, thus making for a tonally inconsistent movie that quite frankly did nothing to progress Thor's character and was only saved by a phenomenal performance by Tom Hiddleston as Loki. Were we going to get a repeat of that in "Thor: Ragnarok"? Thankfully Marvel seemingly learned from their mistakes and knew that they needed to take this franchise in a different direction in order to make it relevant again. To pull off this stunt, they brought in the perfect director in Taika Waititi, who simply works magic in this movie. Yes, Ragnarok is still the story arc. But it's not super dark and ominous as you might think. Cate Blanchett's Hela is wreaking havoc on Asgard while Thor ends up trapped on the planet Sakaar where he has to try to find a way to escape and go save Asgard.

The plot is a bit more complex than that, but that's all I really want to say. It's a story that I found myself surprisingly invested in. The best part of this is that Taika Waititi did a great job of unleashing Chris Hemsworth. If you've watched Chris Hemsworth in other movies, he's actually a really funny guy with a lot of charm and charisma. He's a lot more than just the sexiest man alive that can pull of a decently dramatic performance when asked to. If you want a sample of his more crazy, goofy self, go watch "The Cabin in the Woods" or the new remake of "Ghostbusters." He's hilarious in both of those. Yet I feel that so far Marvel has been holding him back because they want him as the serious, hammer-wielding Norse God. He was funny in "Thor" because of the fish-out-of-water story. In "Thor: The Dark World" they did nothing with him. And in the two Avengers movies, they turned to the likes of Tony Stark for the comedy element, while occasionally giving Thor a one-liner to deliver. In "Thor: Ragnarok," though, Chris Hemsworth feels much more relaxed and comfortable than he's ever been as Thor. He's hilarious in this movie, yet he's still super boss in action sequences. Perhaps even more so since they take away his hammer and give him his lightning abilities.

I also like the fact that Thor is once again given an arc in this film, which he hasn't been given in any of his appearances in the MCU since "Thor" in 2011. Thus I think people have grown bored with Thor. Captain America and Iron Man are people's favorite Avengers for the most part. While there's a handful of others that people will say, Thor has not usually been in the conversation. But I think that'll change after this movie. While Chris Hemsworth is relaxed and funny in this movie, he's also been given a lot to do. Not only is bounced around the galaxy like a ping-pong ball in the first act of the movie and stuck on Sakaar with Hulk in the second act, but the fact that he's lost his hammer makes him a bit insecure and the fact that Hela seems to be way beyond his league has given him a lack of confidence that he has to learn to overcome. I like conversations that are had in the movie where Thor is told that the hammer was never the source of his power, but essentially has become a crutch for him. He's not the God of Hammers. He's the God of Lightning and he needs to figure out how to unleash his full potential in order to be the King and leader that the Asgardians need him to be. I think all of this makes Thor relevant again in the MCU.

But this is much more than just a movie that makes Thor relevant again. We have a huge cast of characters that could make for an overcrowded movie for many directors, but Taika Waititi has balanced them perfectly and weaved all of their stories together rather beautifully. The whole second act of this film is the MCU's version of Planet Hulk. Yes, I said the second act, not the first act. And yes, I said the entire second act. We spend a lot more time on Sakaar than I was expecting and we give a lot of character progression to Hulk, who does a lot more talking in this movie than I've ever seen him do. But the movie gives him a lot of depth that I enjoyed. When he eventually turns back into Bruce Banner, Mark Ruffalo is given equal treatment in terms of character development. Then we have the continued progression of Tom Hiddleston's Loki, who again is fantastic. We also have the return of Idris Elba's Heimdall, the addition of Cate Blanchett as Hela, Jeff Goldblum as the Grandmaster, Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie, Karl Urban as Skurge, as well as some other characters that I didn't expect to be in this movie. They were all given equal treatment in this movie by Waititi and I loved all of them. I could spend a paragraph on each one if I wanted to.

With so many characters in this movie and so much story to tell, this really shouldn't work. But I think this speaks leaps and bounds about Taika Waititi as a powerhouse director. Marvel's specialty right now is finding these smaller directors and turning them into household names and they've discovered another goldmine with Waititi. If you have no idea who this guy is, I promise you will. After seeing this movie, or perhaps before, I encourage you to go watch "Hunt for the Wilderpeople." It's a smaller, independent film from Waititi that reminded me of a live-action version of "Up." And I mean that in the absolute best way possible. It's so good. If you promise to go watch "Hunt for the Wilderpeople," I promise to go watch "What We Do in the Shadows," because I hear that's another fantastic movie from him. I believe Marvel saw these two films and decided to see what he could do with a big-budget blockbuster film and man did he work miracles. I think he has a very successful career as a director ahead of him thanks to this movie. There is so much going on in terms of story and characters and it's all weaved together so perfectly that now I can comfortable claim that "Thor: Ragnarok" is one of my favorite Marvel films and I'm giving it a very strong 9/10.