Endgame Thor/God of Thunder - Chris Hemsworth

[Iceman]

He looks great in these.

 

[HammerDown]

So apparently this is some early concept art for Stormbreaker before it got the Groot handle. I gotta say this all metallic look works much better for me.

 

[HammerDown]

 

[Boy Scout]

Not gonna lie, that made me tear up a bit.

 

[BoredGuy]

My favorite look for Thor is the Roadworn one from the begining of Ragnarok.
But this one in AEG is damn near perfect and without the big bely it would be my nr 1. The long hair and beard fit perfectly.

I love the hair and the beard
but i'm not a huge fan of the all black look, the black armor sleeves look rubber-y and I don't like the cover over the cape, and yeah, the gut too

If you gave him the look from beginning of Ragnarok, or even his Dark World/AoU look which I liked a lot, with that hair and beard, it would be amazing

 

[HammerDown]

I love the hair and the beard
but i'm not a huge fan of the all black look, the black armor sleeves look rubber-y and I don't like the cover over the cape, and yeah, the gut too

If you gave him the look from beginning of Ragnarok, or even his Dark World/AoU look which I liked a lot, with that hair and beard, it would be amazing

I would also love to see a silver/metalic armour variant like in the comics.

 

[samsnee]

Good interview. He auditioned for Gambit in the Wolverine movie and Duke in GI Joe. Thankfully he didn’t get them.

How Chris Hemsworth Found His Way as a Movie Star With Thor and ‘The Avengers’

 

[HammerDown]

 

[The_Manhunter]

Question: am I the only Thor fan who actually liked his arc in Endgame? I thought it made complete sense for the character.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I'll always feel everything, the start, the "empty kill", the depression, the weight gain, the self loathing and his meeting with his mother which sets him on a road to recovery are all good and valid. And unlike others I don't think this tainted the character nor "ruined" him.

BUT... Because it's Marvel and because why do 5 jokes when you can do five times as many, they went too far with playing it for laughs so that the overall impression for some was that he was just a comedic relief. They can't see the dramatic arc because Marvel relies on comedy as a crutch and because the fan community themselves has vehemently argued that this formula is beyond any criticism for years. SOOOO... They didn't see an issue with having non-stop jokes around Thor's arc, even when talking with his dead to him mother. And again, they had precedent in not even taking how this could affect this drama because the previous Thor film is literally filled to the brim with humor that overshadows any of the movie's dramatic heft, what there is anyway. RAGNAROK has multiple moments that should be devastating to Thor on a character level. That stuff is either glossed over with zero weight given to what should be giant revelations to Thor (and all of Asgard really... How was all this kept from Thor anyway? Does that even make sense?) or the film just doesn't really care. In fact that's the issue. When you care about a story's drama things are given weight and consideration and there is a primacy given to a certain amount of consistency. But... When you wanna just get a laugh? None of that matters. Comedy is not only the death of dignity but since getting the laugh above all else IS the point, you can often times also chuck just about everything else away. And fellow fans... That's what they did in RAGNAROK, that's what the fans ate up and so many made sure that anyone that thought differently was shouted down online. And because of that, Hemsworth, Marvel, Feige and Co. and the Russos all thought tripling down on Thor's turn from Noble Warrior Prince to Dude Bro Meathead with a Heart of Gold was the way to go so that there was some character flying the flag of Marvel Studios brand humor amid the dramatic tale that was Endgame. (And before anyone chimes in... Yeah, there were other characters saying and doing funny stuff but Thor got the lion's share of comedic heavy lifting in this. More than Lang or Bruce or any other person on screen.)

Once more... I think Thor's arc is fine. And I thought his action scenes were awesome at the end. But in my opinion the issue that is dividing the Thor fan base is one that is:

1. Of their own making by accepting RAGNAROK's take whole hog with the mistake that said film "fixed" Thor, who did not in any way need fixing and certainly didn't need a comedic makeover which forsakes any other important aspect of the character.

2. Thor's arc was overshadowed by the Marvel Formula of adding superfluous comedy where it's almost NEVER needed. That's not to say not to have humor. It's that an EXCESS undercuts a legitimate super hero story. And it's not even something that comes from the source material. The level of humor in most character's books has always been dependent on the character. Spidey and Deadpool books? Humor should be there always. Sometimes a run will have a writer that can handle humor really well. When I read David's 90's Hulk it absolutely was a joy because he handled comedy so well. But that's not the only thing he did. He also delivered on great drama and characterization and that stuff was never cut off at the knees because of his comedy. Also, as I always say... I never bought a book because of the jokes. I never said, "Well... Gotta get this Month's Thor/Silver Surfer/X-Men/Capt. Marvel/New Warriors/Ghost Rider to see what jokes the writers have come up with." Not once. Unfortunately when it comes to MCU films about half the time they seem to put a lot more thought into how the comedy works over how the super hero story should. Thus we are left with films that about half the time work on the level of their humor but are kinda perfunctory about every single other thing.

 

[Fosterson]

None of that matters. Comedy is not only the death of dignity but since getting the laugh above all else IS the point, you can often times also chuck just about everything else away. And fellow fans... That's what they did in RAGNAROK, that's what the fans ate up and so many made sure that anyone that thought differently was shouted down online. And because of that, Hemsworth, Marvel, Feige and Co. and the Russos all thought tripling down on Thor's turn from Noble Warrior Prince to Dude Bro Meathead with a Heart of Gold was the way to go so that there was some character flying the flag of Marvel Studios brand humor amid the dramatic tale that was Endgame.

"Blaming" (assuming that's the right word) the fans for fat Thor is really unfair IMO. EG was written and (mostly) shot LONG before Ragnarok hit cinemas. The Russos themselves stated that they pitched fat Thor to Hemsworth before shooting for Ragnarok had even finished. The idea that the positive critical and financial response to Ragnarok is what prompted Feige and Co. to go in the direction they went in is absurd.

This was clearly something they had been planning for a while, and they would have gone ahead with it REGARDLESS of what the response to Ragnarok was.

Of their own making by accepting RAGNAROK's take whole hog with the mistake that said film "fixed" Thor, who did not in any way need fixing and certainly didn't need a comedic makeover which forsakes any other important aspect of the character.

I also had no problem with pre-Ragnarok Thor, but I recognise that he did need a bit of a makeover in order to make him more popular among general audiences. The surge in popularity for the character after Ragnarok and IW shows that this was successful. After AoU, many saw Thor as the also-rans of the Avengers; after IW he was seen as the MVP.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

"Blaming" (assuming that's the right word) the fans for fat Thor is really unfair IMO. EG was written and (mostly) shot LONG before Ragnarok hit cinemas. The Russos themselves stated that they pitched fat Thor to Hemsworth before shooting for Ragnarok had even finished. The idea that the positive critical and financial response to Ragnarok is what prompted Feige and Co. to go in the direction they went in is absurd.

This was clearly something they had been planning for a while, and they would have gone ahead with it REGARDLESS of what the response to Ragnarok was.



I also had no problem with pre-Ragnarok Thor, but I recognise that he did need a bit of a makeover in order to make him more popular among general audiences. The surge in popularity for the character after Ragnarok and IW shows that this was successful. After AoU, many saw Thor as the also-rans of the Avengers; after IW he was seen as the MVP.

Notice that I didn't say him being "fat" was the issue. A depressed and out of shape Thor isn't the problem for me. I have zero issue with that. Playing it up for laughs to the point that the comedy overtakes the pathos is. And I'm sorry but the response of the previous Thor film played into that. That take wasn't created whole cloth by the Russos. Which isn't to say that humor hasn't always played a part in MCU Thor. But it was Ragnarok that turned it up to 11 and ripped the knob off.

And I thought Thor was great in IW. But not just because of MVP power displays. For stuff like this:



Which does have some humorous accents. But what did most come away with from this scene? Was it the fleeting humor or the emotions being played for real? Yes, even with a talking tree and Raccoon in the scene.

Look, there's no way you do an arc where Thor becomes depressed and then out of shape without mining that for some laughs. That's just gonna happen with something like that. But... Did it need to be done THAT much? To the point that even with his mom we get a litany of one liners? And honestly... The Queen of Asgard says the line "Eat a salad"?

Look, I liked Thor in AEG but had they done what they should always do, cut the humor down by half rather than rely on it as an easy and cheap way to ingratiate these movies with the audience, the dramatic material would register more and be given more play in the films' run times.

 

[Zarex]

"Eat a salad" was funny, but I don't think Frigga was going for the yuks. She was a mom showing genuine concern for her big baby boy. I thought the line was both sweet and amusing.

The only Fat Thor joke I didn't care for was Rhodey's Cheez Whiz remark. I thought it cruel and out of line. The other cracks were exactly what you would expect from long time friends and colleagues. Expecting Rocket and Tony to ignore the literal elephant (sorry!) in the room would have been out of character.

 

[Bren]

normally like your posts (and agree with them) but your idea of Thor fans being to blame for Joke Thor in AEG is nonsense.

I hear time and again a movie's box office success is based on many things, a major one being roping in casuals who would otherwise not see a film. That fans and (even moreso) fanboys won't account for major box office success. So to whom do we attribute Ragnarok's success to? Fans or interested casuals?

I honestly saw a reasonable split of comments here on SHH, that Thor and Ragnarok's comedy lean was too much (using SHH as a guide, assuming most casuals won't be posting here). I was one of those not completely happy with the amount of Thor comedy.

On top of that, IW Thor was seriously enjoyed/loved by most. And he wasn't over the top. So the change in AEG had imo little to do with re-imagining the character based on fan reaction and more basically a Marvel misstep in how to tell that part of a story.

Ragnarok's success could have contributed to the oversaturation but to blame Thor fans is rather silly and not like you at all.

 

[Fosterson]

Notice that I didn't say him being "fat" was the issue. A depressed and out of shape Thor isn't the problem for me. I have zero issue with that. Playing it up for laughs to the point that the comedy overtakes the pathos is. And I'm sorry but the response of the previous Thor film played into that. That take wasn't created whole cloth by the Russos. Which isn't to say that humor hasn't always played a part in MCU Thor. But it was Ragnarok that turned it up to 11 and ripped the knob off.

Again, blaming the fans for this is unfair. Hardcore fans (especially those of us who spend time on forums like this) comprise a tiny minority of the overall audience of the people who go to see these movies. Our impact on a movie's financial performance is virtually negligible. What matters are the much larger numbers of more casual viewers, most of whom have little to no knowledge of the source material and who don't spend hours obsessing over every small detail like we do.

So, if anything you should be blaming Goofy Thor on the casual audience members who clearly prefer this version of Thor to how he was before and voted with their feet to show it.

You're welcome to your own opinions about how Thor was portrayed in EG; my issue is with claiming that the fans somehow brought this upon themselves.

I actually largely agree with you that the problem with Thor in EG wasn't what they did, but rather how they executed it.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

 

[HammerDown]

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I'll always feel everything, the start, the "empty kill", the depression, the weight gain, the self loathing and his meeting with his mother which sets him on a road to recovery are all good and valid. And unlike others I don't think this tainted the character nor "ruined" him.

BUT... Because it's Marvel and because why do 5 jokes when you can do five times as many, they went too far with playing it for laughs so that the overall impression for some was that he was just a comedic relief. They can't see the dramatic arc because Marvel relies on comedy as a crutch and because the fan community themselves has vehemently argued that this formula is beyond any criticism for years. SOOOO... They didn't see an issue with having non-stop jokes around Thor's arc, even when talking with his dead to him mother. And again, they had precedent in not even taking how this could affect this drama because the previous Thor film is literally filled to the brim with humor that overshadows any of the movie's dramatic heft, what there is anyway. RAGNAROK has multiple moments that should be devastating to Thor on a character level. That stuff is either glossed over with zero weight given to what should be giant revelations to Thor (and all of Asgard really... How was all this kept from Thor anyway? Does that even make sense?) or the film just doesn't really care. In fact that's the issue. When you care about a story's drama things are given weight and consideration and there is a primacy given to a certain amount of consistency. But... When you wanna just get a laugh? None of that matters. Comedy is not only the death of dignity but since getting the laugh above all else IS the point, you can often times also chuck just about everything else away. And fellow fans... That's what they did in RAGNAROK, that's what the fans ate up and so many made sure that anyone that thought differently was shouted down online. And because of that, Hemsworth, Marvel, Feige and Co. and the Russos all thought tripling down on Thor's turn from Noble Warrior Prince to Dude Bro Meathead with a Heart of Gold was the way to go so that there was some character flying the flag of Marvel Studios brand humor amid the dramatic tale that was Endgame. (And before anyone chimes in... Yeah, there were other characters saying and doing funny stuff but Thor got the lion's share of comedic heavy lifting in this. More than Lang or Bruce or any other person on screen.)

Once more... I think Thor's arc is fine. And I thought his action scenes were awesome at the end. But in my opinion the issue that is dividing the Thor fan base is one that is:

1. Of their own making by accepting RAGNAROK's take whole hog with the mistake that said film "fixed" Thor, who did not in any way need fixing and certainly didn't need a comedic makeover which forsakes any other important aspect of the character.

2. Thor's arc was overshadowed by the Marvel Formula of adding superfluous comedy where it's almost NEVER needed. That's not to say not to have humor. It's that an EXCESS undercuts a legitimate super hero story. And it's not even something that comes from the source material. The level of humor in most character's books has always been dependent on the character. Spidey and Deadpool books? Humor should be there always. Sometimes a run will have a writer that can handle humor really well. When I read David's 90's Hulk it absolutely was a joy because he handled comedy so well. But that's not the only thing he did. He also delivered on great drama and characterization and that stuff was never cut off at the knees because of his comedy. Also, as I always say... I never bought a book because of the jokes. I never said, "Well... Gotta get this Month's Thor/Silver Surfer/X-Men/Capt. Marvel/New Warriors/Ghost Rider to see what jokes the writers have come up with." Not once. Unfortunately when it comes to MCU films about half the time they seem to put a lot more thought into how the comedy works over how the super hero story should. Thus we are left with films that about half the time work on the level of their humor but are kinda perfunctory about every single other thing.

Excellent post. This mirrors my thoughts/feelings as well.

When Thor was trying to step up to be the one to put on the infinity stone gauntlet to save everyone, you could feel his need for it. His need to do something good and earn maybe what he'd lost. But then almost immediately it's ruined by Rhodey making a joke about Thor being filled with cheese whiz. I felt like that was happening constantly with Thor and imo it was distracting to be sympathetic to his arc.

I don't mind him becoming fat, out of shape, 'losing it' because of what happened. They could have created these great character moments...but imo it didn't resonate cause they turned them all into a comedic act.

In the end, imo, it makes his turn feel like the creators needed to find a way to nerf Thor. And that's too bad.

I'm looking forward to see how he gains redemption but with Endgame I'm really disappointed with Thor.

 

[HammerDown]

 

[harlequinade]

Well with another HemsBomb it's safe to say he is definitely gonna do more MCU films

 

[herolee10]

Honestly, I feel like Thor's vision in "AOU" really hit the nail on the head when it came to revealing his real role within the MCU: The Destroyer.

I took some time to re-watch all of Thor's films (both solo and Avengers films) and the dude has unintentionally caused more trouble and mess than any other hero that I can think of at the moment.

It was by his "heroic" actions that led to the following disasters:

- Destroying the Bi-Frost ended up sending the nine realms into chaos due to Asgard no longer having no means of transportation.

- Thor bringing Jane to Asgard and freeing Loki led to the death of his mother and banishment of his father.

- Thor destroyed "Asgard" in order to stop Hela from advancing her conquest.

- Thor's actions in "Ragnarok" led to half of his surviving populace being slaughtered by Thanos.

- Thor had the best chance to stop Thanos from wiping out half of all life in the universe. He failed.

So again, are we still sure that the dude is an good hero when compared to everyone else? I'm not so sure anymore. It seems like the MCU would have actually been better off without him.

 

[Fosterson]

I took some time to re-watch all of Thor's films (both solo and Avengers films) and the dude has unintentionally caused more trouble and mess than any other hero that I can think of at the moment.

Pretty sure Tony is way worse here. His ***holery led directly to both Aldrich Killian becoming a bad guy and Ultron nearly destroying the planet.

Oh, and Civil War, anyone?

Destroying the Bi-Frost ended up sending the nine realms into chaos due to Asgard no longer having no means of transportation.

And thereby prevented the extermination of the Frost Giants.

Thor bringing Jane to Asgard and freeing Loki led to the death of his mother and banishment of his father.

And? If Thor had left Jane on Earth, then Malekith would have just gone there and taken it from her and turned the Nine Realms into red goo.

Thor destroyed "Asgard" in order to stop Hela from advancing her conquest.

- Thor's actions in "Ragnarok" led to half of his surviving populace being slaughtered by Thanos.

What? So he should have allowed Hela to kill him, Hulk and Valkyrie? because that's what WOULD have happened if he hadn't unleashed Surtur.

Thor had the best chance to stop Thanos from wiping out half of all life in the universe. He failed.

Because he let his emotions cloud his judgement. It's called being flawed.

So again, are we still sure that the dude is an good hero when compared to everyone else? I'm not so sure anymore. It seems like the MCU would have actually been better off without him.

Yeah, because I'm pretty sure the Avengers could have defeated the Chitauri and Ultron without him. Never mind that Tony NEEDED Thor to destroy Sokovia. And I'm sure somebody else would have stopped the Destroyer, Hela and Malekith. And never mind that if Thor hadn't shown up in Wakanda in IW, then the entire Avengers team would have been massacred right there and then.

Seriously dude, this over-dramatic stuff is getting ridiculous.

 

[herolee10]

Well just to clarify, I am not saying that he made those mistakes intentionally. It just feels like he comes off more as controlled chaos than the standard portrait of a hero that I am used to seeing.

In regards to AOU; I think Wanda, Hulk, and Vision were all capable of defeating Ultron without Thor's involvement.

Also, can some explain on how Thor showing up in Wakanda made a difference in long run since the snap still took place despite his epic arrival.

If anything, the biggest issue stems from the fact that Thor played no large role in defeating Thanos and undoing his snap in EG. Cap led the charge against his army, Iron sacrificed himself to stop Thanos, Hulk undid the snap, Black Widow gave up her life for the soul stone, and Hawkeye kept the gauntlet from Thanos's clutches.

 

[Fosterson]

Well just to clarify, I am not saying that he made those mistakes intentionally.

Neither did Tony with regard to Killian and Ultron.

In regards to AOU; I think Wanda, Hulk, and Vision were all capable of defeating Ultron without Thor's involvement.

Aside from the fact that Tony explicitly stated that he needed Thor to crack the Vibranium core and destroy the city.

Also, can some explain on how Thor showing up in Wakanda made a difference in long run since the snap still took place despite his epic arrival.

Cap and the rest were about to get mauled to death by the Outriders. If they had died there, then good luck undoing the Snap in EG.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Yeah... Now because Thor wasn't the bestest, greatest, most awesomest super dupery hero of all time in Endgame he's a complete and utter failure retroactively as well.

Please stop. This isn't healthy.

Thor' arc is fine. It was too overshadowed by humor, which is a general issue with Marvel Studios films on the whole. But it's still a solid and valid arc.

You know what else is good on the hole?


Preparation H.