What about the movie was actually better than the comics, and what was worse?

[pr0xyt0xin]

As a Thor movie it lacked an appropriate amount of action. Probably shouldve had more 9 realms stuff too.

But I think it's omission of the original Donald Blake story and some of his silly powers from the early comics were great choices.

But I agree, Hemsworth, Hiddleston and Hopkins are what make me excited for the future of the franchise.

 

[Steve Sanders]

Better: To me, the most obvious is Mjolnir. I don't think the design could've been any better.

Also, I think not having the Donald Blake identity was a good call.


Worst: Even though I understand why the costume had to be the way it was, and it did grow on me somewhat, it just wasn't Thor enough.

I don't think the actors playing Volstagg and Heimdall were the best choices.

Never read the comic but I did not like him having a beard.I mean can you imagine superman flying around with a beard? I loved the movie so much I did not think about it till later when it dawned on me i started thinking-wait a minute>i know what Thor looks like,he doesnt have a beard.whats up with that?

 

[Sian]

The best thing in it - actually making Loki good looking.

In Norse Myth he was beautiful.

The worse thing - making them out as aliens not gods.

 

[TeeKay]

Never read the comic but I did not like him having a beard.I mean can you imagine superman flying around with a beard? I loved the movie so much I did not think about it till later when it dawned on me i started thinking-wait a minute>i know what Thor looks like,he doesnt have a beard.whats up with that?

Ummmmm...

That's Thor from the Ultimate comics. They didn't give Thor a beard based in nothing. Besides, he looks better with it IMO.