Thor: the Dark World or “Loki: the Loki-ing”

 Well, I don’t know if anyone is reading this, but like I said, no one would take me seriously if I made another flounce, so here I am. Again, Utopia Defined will be a long time coming, due to the amount of research required.

So Thor: the Dark World (TDW) aka the hot mess of the MCU. I suppose you could make a case that its predecessor, Iron Man 3, was a hot mess, but while it was in places, there were also some genuinely compelling elements like Tony’s PTSD. Whereas TDW is just a hot mess. 

To the extent anyone remembers anything about TDW, they remember Loki. Hence my alternate title. That mothereffer effectively stole every scene he was in, put in the bank and drew interest, making sure to invest his earnings in an offshore tax shelter so the IRS can’t get their hands on it. Tom Hiddleston is just terrific, clearly having a fabulous time with this part. 

I remain disappointed that no one answered my Tom Hiddleston vs. Benedict Cumberbatch question.

Anyway, if this review is kind of skimpy, well, it’s because outside of Loki, there’s nothing really memorable about this movie. It’s not as completely unmemorable as The Incredible Hulk but that’s not much of an accomplishment.

Following his attempt to conquer Earth, Loki has been packed off to an Asgardian prison. And Odin, being the kind of guy he is, wastes no time when it comes to being a dick. Yeah, Odin, real mystery why Loki has issues, what with the whole treating him as a political hostage rather than, y’know, your child. It’s understandable why the fangirls woobify Loki so much and while I don’t judge them too harshly for it, me, I much prefer my Loki to have something of an amoral streak.

As for what Thor’s been up to, well, after the Battle of New York, he decides to meet up with Natalie Portman.

He’s a muscle-bound Demi-god and she’s an ethereally beautiful nerd. I have no idea how their relationship works; I just know that Natalie Portman causes me to question my commitment to heterosexuality whereas Chris Hemsworth causes me to want to renew my commitment to heterosexuality, making me wonder if having them play a couple, isn’t the equivalent of putting a humidifier and dehumidifier side by side and letting them battle it out.

Let us never forget that the Four Chris Debate has been effectively resolved.

Reposting image because no one read my previous Thor post, and I’m petty as heck.

But Jane has her own issues right now.

Basically, Jane Foster has some red energy inside her that makes gravity and everything else behave wonky. So Thor brings her home to Asgard.

Ah, Odin hardly wastes any time when it comes to being a dick. Like I said before, with the sheer amount of dickish dads in the Marvel-verse (Odin, Howard Stark, Hank Pym, Harold Barton, Brian Banner, occasionally Joseph Rogers), it makes me wonder if anyone ever asked Stan Lee or Jack Kirby to show on a doll what the bad man did to them. The DC-verse probably has their share of dickish dads, but it doesn’t seem quite as extensive as Marvel, where nearly every Avenger can wear a “My Dad’s a Dick!” shirt.

I wonder if this has something to do with the differing approaches Marvel and DC take to their heroes. DC has long held its heroes as aspirational figures, people to aspire towards. I’m not saying that DC Comics’ characters are completely lacking in flaws or compelling drama but that’s the approach they take.

Whereas Marvel has long gone for a more grounded approach, showing its characters as people struggling to deal not only with the great responsibilities placed on their broad shoulders, but also ordinary stuff like trying to pay the bills.

Note, I didn’t use the world “realistic” when talking about Marvel, because while defenders of Marvel will claim that their characters are more realistic, really, there’s almost nothing realistic about superheroes. Superheroes are inherently a romanticization, modern day tales of the knight-errant as Linkara puts it in one of his best speeches.

And given, as I assert in my opening “Utopia Defined” post, we live in a stunted reality, I am more in favor of romanticization. 

Still the differing approaches Marvel and DC take to their characters can be utilized in compelling ways as seen in the Kurt Busiek and George Perez JLA/Avengers crossover, where initially the Avengers are appalled by all the massive statues of JLA members, believing that they force the populace to worship them as gods. And moments like when Aquaman argues with Doctor Doom about governing a population. 

And just in case you don’t trust my word regarding said crossover, you better believe I’ll post Linkara’s review just so you can see some of it for yourself. Part One, and Part Two.

Unfortunately, the comic itself is unavailable in trade, probably due to copyright issues, so the only way you can read this fabulous work of art, is to buy used comics, which costs mucho dinero. 

On an unrelated note,  I have a Ko-Fi. If you want to drop some bucks in my cup as thanks, feel free.

Anyway, back to the movie.

But someone else is interested in the red stuff inside Natalie Portman. Meet Malekith the Accursed

And I don’t know if anyone has been participating in the debate over which Marvel villain qualifies as Zero (as in there is nothing, nothing remotely memorable about them), but for those who guessed Malekith, come on down and collect your prize, which amounts to bragging rights.

Because there is nothing remotely memorable about Malekith. He woodenly walks through this movie never demonstrating anything resembling a personality, barely displaying the stereotypical “I’m a villain and I’m having a ball” traits seen in superhero villains.

There is no sense of life behind the character, even though superhero villains are traditionally the scenery chewers, the over-the-top grandiosity a defining trait. Granted, MCU villains (with the exception of Loki) are generally boring and bland until Phase Three, but even other Phase One and Two villains demonstrate occasional signs of life, but not Malekith.

In fairness, given how charismatic Loki is, maybe there was no chance for Malekith to be livelier than cold gravy. Malekith is played by Christopher Eccleston who played the ninth incarnation of The Doctor. Being a Baby Whovian who has only seen the 13th Doctor* and a handful of other episodes and having never seen any 9th Doctor episodes, I can’t give any comments about his performance, whether his version of The Doctor demonstrates any charisma or wit. But he certainly doesn’t demonstrate any charisma or wit in TDW. 

Granted TDW is desperately underwritten and Malekith is even more so, and there’s only so much that even a good actor can do to save a bad part. Eccleston has almost nothing to work with, so I don’t hold this film against him.**

Probably no scene better illustrates the desperately underwritten nature of this movie, that this moment: The Death of Frigga

 I put this picture up for a reason; fear not, there is a method to my madness. There are a wide variety of tests regarding female characters, The Bechdel being the most famous. To this list, I want to add another one to the pile.

Thor’s Mum rule – If you’re going to kill a character who’s carried any part of the plot, take a bit to reimagine the plot as if she were the main character, and the story ends when she dies.  If it’s unsatisfying, rewrite either her plot points, or her death, to make both more meaningful.

Frigga's death is a classic "woman in the refrigerator" moment, her death serving more to cause the men in her life Man-Pain. Oh sure, the movie puts forth some effort to go "Be sad! Be sad at this moment!" but Frigga has mattered so little that there's no way her death could have any impact. The only reason it has any impact is due not to the writing, but Tom Hiddleston and Rene Russo got together and basically decided that Loki and Frigga would share a close bond.

So yeah, for those of you who haven't figured out the common pattern of the three cut scenes from the first Thor movie, the common thread is Frigga. Putting these scenes in the movie wouldn't completely alleviate all the problems with her character, but they would give her death more of an impact, especially the one where she says that Odin should have told Loki the truth. Regarding this movie, this scene with her should have gone into the final project as well. Granted, really the whole part needs to be rewritten, but I'm thinking from a more practical standpoint: what can we do with what exists, rather than try to re-direct a whole film. 

I will admit that the death scene we did get is better than the alternate version where Frigga is even more unceremoniously dispatched and Odin, once again, is a colossal dick. 

Anyway, there is really nothing left for me to talk about this movie. I know all of you are getting tired of me using the word "underwritten" when it comes to this movie, but really, it's the best way of summing it up. 

The only real lasting plot points that come to play in later movies is Loki fakes his death yet again and is now ruling Asgard, disguised as Odin. 

 Image posted because it is so damn true. The one time Odin displays any fatherly warmth is when Loki is pretending to be him. While I know that there are more likely reasons, my personal headcanon is that was how Thor eventually figures out. At some point between TDW and Ragnarok, Thor's like, "Wait a minute, my father was being much less of a dick than usual..." 

tl;dr, this movie is only worth it for Loki. I've heard some theorize that maybe this was his plan all along to wind up in prison so he could eventually worm his way onto the throne of Asgard, but I don't buy it. I just can't picture Loki coming up with a plan that would require him to get beaten as badly as he was in the Battle of New York. 

*Yes, I did become a Whovian mostly out of spite, mother. Surest way to get me onboard with a property is for whiny-ass white male fanboys to lose their shit over it. It's also the surest way to make me a fan of a character: if the fans/writers bash or excessively mistreat them. I suppose I should be disturbed by how spite drives so many of my motivations, but I don't care enough to fix it. 

**The only actors/actresses I really hold grudges against are Sean Penn, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Jared Leto. Sean Penn is just the smuggest human being on this planet, so smug that even though I often agree with his politics, I still want to punch him in his stupid face. Gwyneth Paltrow, for all the Goop BS. It's a shame because Pepper Potts is one of my favorite minor characters in the MCU. 

As for Jared Leto, it should be obvious. I have long spear-headed the "Rescind Jared Leto's Oscar and Give it to Margot Robbie!" campaign. Not only did Margot Robbie have to put up with all his Joker BS, she had to pretend that she was attracted to all this BS, an acting feat that would stymie even Laurence Olivier. Margot Robbie did actual method acting: studying psychology, becoming a gymnast, and doing most of her own stunts as Harley Quinn and is the lotus rising from the muck of the first Suicide Squad movie; Leto was just a creepy-ass sex offender who would have been blackballed were it not for the fact he is a rich White man and is practically immune from consequences. :deep breath: Seriously, it should be a rule: no Oscar-winner should deliver a performance that bad.