‘Thor: The Dark World’ Clip & TV Spots: Asgard Goes to War

Published 2 years ago by

We’ve done of plenty of digging into what’s coming in Marvel’s Phase Two lineup of films, and since Thor: The Dark World has been of particular interest to us (given its potential lynchpin position in the Phase Two story arc), we’ve identified no less than 25 points of interest that you should keep a trained eye on as you watch it.

Now you can begin that examination for yourself, as today brings two new Thor 2 TV spots and the first clip from the film, featuring Thor (Chris Hemsworth) reuniting with his villainous brother, Loki (Tom Hiddleston), in the depths of an Asgardian prison.

Check out the clip above, the TV Spots below:

517958422 3 620 439 Thor: The Dark World Clip & TV Spots: Asgard Goes to War


517958423 3 620 439 Thor: The Dark World Clip & TV Spots: Asgard Goes to War

This new footage reveals more of the expanded story details we have been reporting for a bit now – namely Dark World‘s connection to Thor and Avengers. Thanks to Thor’s destruction of the Bifrost portal system at the end of the first film, Asgard has limited capability to police the universe, allowing darkness like Malekith the dark elf (Christopher Eccleston) to rise in the cosmos (with Thanos still plotting somewhere in the wings, no doubt).

Of course, the actual course of events that sends Thor to Loki asking for aid – or lands Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) in Asgard and later in peril (as seen in the Thor 2 trailer) – still remain a mystery. And how this standalone story will catalyze the events of future “Marvel Cosmic” films – like Guardians of the Galaxy and/or Doctor Strange – remains a mystery, as well.

Thor 2 Dark World Clips TV Spots 20131 Thor: The Dark World Clip & TV Spots: Asgard Goes to War

In meantime: director Alan Taylor (Game of Thrones) has certainly crafted something more epic and ambitious in scope – while also giving the sci-fi/fantasy elements of the film a more grounded and medieval presentation than Kenneth Branagh’s CGI-heavy first film. Of course, both films seem to need polish when it comes to Thor’s powers in action – that sequence of the Thunder god falling out of the sky to smite his enemies doesn’t quite equal the superpowered action we saw in Superman’s latest outing. (Ooops… should I not have said that?)


We’ll find out just how much action and story details are in store when Thor: The Dark World hits theaters on November 8, 2013.

Sources: Marvel & Fandango

Follow Kofi Outlaw on Twitter @ppnkof
TAGS: Thor 2
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. That shot of Thor jumping off the balcony and catching his hammer in mid flight was creative and impressive. I’m so pumped for this. :D

    • Yes

    • Yup, very cool.


    • @ Taona – agreed! Also, when he catches Mjolnir as he comes out of the bifrost he looks like a total boss. These TV spots are getting me so pumped for this film too!!!! :)

  2. I hate when whoever makes the trailers redubs dialogue that doesnt even match. like in the first clip loki says “when do we start” when hes sitting down. then all of a sudden he says it when he is standing up in the tv spot. also when Loki says “im impressed” thor says thank you, but they use the clip where he is SUPPOSED to say “Anyone else?”.

    just a little nitpick. Nothing against the movie I cant wait. I just think its stupid when they do that in trailers/tv spots.

    • Totally agree. Or how they do that to create fake drama in tv shows even though it never happened. So annoying.

    • yeah, I agree! They just like to fool us like in that one tv spot/clip for SWATH (Snow White & the Huntsman) where the Queen aka Ravenna tells the Huntsman played by Chris Hemsworth: “What would you do to see her again?” making us all believe that she was referring to Snow White! But in the movie it turns out she was talking about his dead wife all along!!! >.< Lol, we got fooled right there!!!

    • Agreed, and in the actual film it’ll probably be at dinner table and loki would say “When do we start?”

    • That’s exactly what I was thinking the whole time I was watching these! I just kept thinking, “These are the same lines of dialogue I’ve heard in every trailer for this movie.” So annoying. I am, however, super pumped for this movie. Can’t wait.

  3. Every new clip/footage of Loki excites me! :D

  4. Theres a grammatical error in the first sentence of the article just so you guys know

    • You forgot the period (.) at the end of your post, fyi.

      • you also spelled “theres” when it should have been “there’s”, fyi (again).

        • lol jeffro

    • Ha Ha!

  5. I will watch Thor: The Dark World.
    I will enjoy it.
    It will be “Titz On A Ritz”.
    That is all.

  6. BRING



    lol, Can’t wait for this!

  7. Very impressive so far. I think this will be a winner in the Marvel movie progression as we march toward Avengers 2.


    Give props where props are due, b*tches.

    That’s all I ask.

    • Apologies for the double post I got modded.


    Give props where props are due, people.

    That’s the only point I’m trying to make here.

    The point exactly? Thank you, Superman. Thank you for forcing a better Thor to be made.

    • I sense a troll

      • …your senses betray you…

        …you are not a jedi yet…

    • I did like Man of Steel but Thor is a completely different hero… if anything he’s more like Wonder Woman and they movie wise I don’t see how they took elements from Man of Steel and but it in TDW. This one seems good because it will have an actual villain not Loki being jealous and trying to be big but that only happened so that it would make sense for him to be involved in the avengers. DANG DC WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO CATCH UP I LOVED MOS BUT MARVEL’S CONTINUITY IS SO GOOD SOOOOOOOO GOOOOOOD!!!!!

      • Thor is more grounded and easier on the mind; superman was just too powerful and the human brain cannot process all that speed and intensity making the film less enjoyable than it should be.

        • I blame too much CGI and not enough takin fit was like watching a Mr. Bean movie

    • for all you know, the re-shoots could have been so they looked LESS like MOS. could be they had some unintentional similarities and wanted to make sure there were no comparisons/claims of rip-off & whatnot. i dont understand your reasoning for CONSTANTLY bringing up this comment.

      • The reshoots were only to add more Loki, it had nothing to do with MoS. Marvel has WB beat it’s not even funny. WB are desperate right now(as Loki would put it).

        • @Dude

          Don’t worry, Ben Affleck will save them…

      • because it’s true, that’s why.

        • More like you want it to be true. Your opinion is no more truth or fact than anyone else’s.

            • I’m pretty sure in an interview with Alan Taylor or Tom Hiddleston they said that the re-shoots were to add more Loki since he has become so adored by fans. This dude is just a troll ignore him and once again Man of Steel is nothing like ANY Marvel movie why would they want it to be like it.

              • It took 3 months to add more loki huh?

                What, you think that Alan Taylor is going to officially say in an interview that his movie got completely changed so it wouldn’t look like a lame duck next to the competitions movie?

                Why do you think a mediator had to be brought in to smooth the situation back in early June?

                The funny thing is, I’m a Marvel fan and I think changing Thor so it can strongly stand side by side with the competition is a very good thing.

                What I am not, is a “Marvelite” who refuses to see what is smack dab in-front of their face.

                MoS offered action sequences the likes of which had yet to be seen yet on film- in particular- mid-air battles and actions sequences THAT DON’T CONSTANTLY SWITCH THE CAMERA, OR USE THE ZOOM IN-OUT TECHNIQUE.

                Not a single Marvel movie, especially the ones with THOR, have employed that technique yet… until now.

                • This what Alan Taylor said:

                  “There’s a rumor out there that I was hanging on to a long cut and that Marvel wanted a shorter cut. Hilariously, that was never an issue because I don’t know what the running time is. The change it’s going through now had nothing to do with running time. There are some tonal pushes and shoves. We have relationships [in the movie] that we need to end the right way and there are new ways of branding them than we had before. The one fall-out I had with Marvel was over music. I had a composer that I really wanted to go with, and it didn’t work out with Marvel” Alan Taylor admitted, referring to Carter Burell, who’s been replaced by Brian Tyler. “So, I was unhappy with that, but I heard the rumor about running time. Not true, I have no idea how long the movie is now. It’s all about making the movie better and better and arm-wrestling over what ‘better’ means. But there have been no running time issues.”

                  • ^^^ *translation*

                    Alan Taylor said:

                    Marvel gave me a crap ton of $$$$$$ to be a good sport about this so here is a bunch of jargon to explain why I’m not upset about my movie being hacked beyond recognition.

                    • Plus, I don’t know why his counter-argument to your opinion is a quote constantly mentioning the running time.

                    • @ Dazz

                      I do. The best way to avoid the unavoidable?


                    • Well Dazz, I was answering a question. Dr. Mindbender asked “why do you think a mediator had to be brought in to smooth the situation back in early June?” The answer is, there never was a mediator. You see, the rumored fallout between Alan Taylor and Marvel had to do with running time. What Taylor was explaining was that rumor was bogus and that in fact, the fall out he really did have with Marvel had to do with Carter Burell doing the score for the movie. What he was also explaining was the purpose of the reshoots.

                    • @ John Carter

                      The reality is, we will never know what happened. Maybe there was a mediator, maybe there wasn’t. Maybe it was about run-time. Maybe it was about the tone. Maybe it was an argument over what flavor ice cream was preferred on set.

                      The point is, you will never get the 100% truth from official statements. If there really was a problem (IMO, I believe there was, ’cause where there is smoke…) you would never hear that problem officially acknowledged and addressed in a statement to the public.

                      They have an image to keep.

                      The kind of response that you do get, is exactly the one Alan Taylor gave.

                      The only thing we can do is speculate, which is exactly what this site is for.

                    • Official statements can be lies no question but rumors are by definition unverified. That information about a mediator was never nothing more than a rumor. Alan Taylor accounted for the fall out between himself and Marvel. We can speculate further but I won’t ignore actual statements, particularly in light of rumors.

                • @ Dr Mindbender

                  I hope you’re right about that because one thing Man of Steel DID get right was its handling of the action scenes.
                  Man of Steel, regardless of what anyone thinks of the film overall, has seriously raised the bar with regards to delivering superpower-based action scenes in a comic book movie, even against a film like The Avengers. Yes, I know you should NOT compare a solo outing like Man of Steel versus an ensemble film like The Avengers, but I still stand by the point.
                  Man of Steel has now ensured that any Marvel or DC film following it has to either match or surpass its delivery of the action scenes/battles, or otherwise be regarded as being inferior by comparison.

                  • +1 For giving props where props are due.

                    • @ Dr Mindbender

                      No problem! I’m neither a Marvel fanboy or a DC fanboy, I just recognize when a film is good or bad in certain way.

                • i seem to recall thor and iron man flying and fighting at the same time in the avengers, and the camera was not ZOOMING IN AND OUT as you put it.

                  • Yes it did. Not once did the camera stay on the action.

                    They fly off into the difference: CAMERA CHANGE

                    They are suddenly up close: CAMERA CHANGE

                    They are back upon ground: CAMERA CHANGE

                    • *distance, not difference


                    • you really are grasping at some straws to support your weak argument.

                    • No. I’m describing exactly what happened. There are no straws being grasped at, rather an “in your face” look at reality.

                    • Now that I am of “clearer mind” *ahem* I can better put into words what I’m referring too:

                      MoS offered several action sequences that employed the use of just one camera angle. The action would start far from the camera, then close to it, then far away again without ever switching the camera angle.

                      The result was a very fluid, very natural feel.

                      Marvel has yet to use shots like that in there films.

                      I PROMISE YOU Thor 2 will be the first Marvel movie to employ this camera technique.

            • Your opinion isn’t based on nothing but it has far too many assumptions and inaccuracies. Thor: The Dark World was not done shooting in early April. They were done with their principal photography in December 2012. Reshoots were happening as early as March 2013 and not to mention they happen all the time. The first trailer also was not out in May, but in April. Burwell left in May 2013 before Man of Steel was released in theaters. Finally, I know which scenes you’re likely talking about with those trailers. Not only is the one from the teaser still in the trailers now, but the scene Thor versus Malekith, particularly that shot of Thor landing on top of that car was shot last year.

              • I had my date mixed up, no doubt. Principle was done in Dec, editing was done in Mar, trailer came out in April.

                They had a movie ready to go… right up until MoS hit, then it was back to the drawing board.

                It’s a good thing mind you. I look forward to a THOR that doesn’t half-ass it with superpowers.

                • They didn’t have a movie ready to go. Burwell, who was doing their score left in May 2013. And the person they hired, Brian Tyler (who did the score for Iron Man 3), wasn’t hired until June 2013. And like I said, they were doing reshoots, not editing in March. And the reshoots they did the past three months didn’t involve Hemsworth or at the very least, little of him as he was shooting another movie in Hong Kong and various other locations. Then you give me examples on scenes that I saw were being shot last year. Either way, they weren’t being half-ass with the superpowers.

            • i don’t know what you are trying to prove with the 2 different trailers. are you implying the scene in the second trailer @ :55 didn’t exist until after mos?
              i remember the 1st time i read your silly theory you implied they removed the scene of thor striking the ground with Mjölnir that caused the bad guys to fall, yet there it is in the tv spot above. it’s entertaining to read some of your conspiracy theories.

              • “i don’t know what you are trying to prove with the 2 different trailers.”

                yes you do.

                ” are you implying the scene in the second trailer @ :55 didn’t exist until after mos?”


                • you have no evidence to support that.

                  • sure i do. that shot didn’t exist in the trailer before MoS… only in the trailer following.

                    Keep steppin Jeffro.

                    • well, there is also the rest of the 2+ hour film that is also not in the trailer. that is a ridiculous argument.

                      try again.

                    • ^^^ and when a weak argument gets destroyed… time for some classic misdirection.

                      Get owned son.

                    • yes, your weak argument was destroyed. by saying footage in the 2nd trailer that was not in the 1st trailer did not exist previously is not proof.

                    • Dude… stop acting like the tone of the first trailer is exactly the same as the second… and that there are visual effects in the second that were there the whole time and have nothing to do with MoS.

                      Why all the talks about re-shoots Jeff? Why all the attention on “adding more Loki?”

                      Was it because Thor 2 was awesome all by itself?

                      Whatever dude. Go ahead and act like MoS had absolutely nothing to do with all the edits to THOR 2, even though the decision to change composer AND call the entire cast back to the set coincided directly with the release of MoS.

                      Completely unrelated, yeah sure… right.

                    • the tone of trailers is different for most trailers. some focus on action. some on comedy. happens for all movies. why are you getting so bent out of shape about this? thor and mos are not in competition with eaxch other. if they were running in the cinemas at the same time, sure. mos is about to hit the home market. it’s made it’s theater money already, and thor is going to make the money it’s going to make, regardless of any reshoots. it has a built in fan-base due to thew fact marvel has been making awesome movies since iron man. they know what the hell they are doing. they did not remake the entire movie as much as you want it to be true. directors have different filming styles. one doesnt want to copy another. you go on and rant some more though.

                    • Weak Jeffro. Weak.

                      “Thor and MoS are not in competition with each other.”

                      They aren’t huh? Right. Because one doesn’t release on DVD just a few days before the other hits the theater.

                      Well, thank you for letting myself and anyone else who is reading this know that they don’t need to listen to a single word that you are saying, since obviously you don’t have a clue.

                    • completely unrelated sales. blu-rays/dvd release on Tuesday’s, theater runs start on a friday, and people are going to buy mos, and go see thor. i’m sure a good portion of the mos sales have already taken place via preordering. they will not be a factor with one another. and thanks for showing you still have no real argument as you want to start the insults. i’m through with this. you’re harshin’ my buzz.
                      have a good night.

                    • Yeah, you are so right Jeffro. Everyone on the planet can afford to buy the DVD AND pay ticket price for Thor 2. What an A-hole I am for assuming that the two are unrelated. DVD spending money is different from theater spending money, and Hollywood is only after the latter.

                      And go ahead and leave, coward.

                    • and there it is. the final act of the defeated. name calling. wow. way to flex those internet muscles. i laugh in your general direction.

                    • No, you are a coward. I stand by that. You said you were done with this, just to come back a few hours later to have the last word.

                      Proclaiming that I am “defeated” doesn’t make it so.

                    • *deep breath*

                      ^^I’m better than this. Jeffro, I scrolled through our back and forth and spotted the exact location where this started to get de-railed, it was this -

                      “You have no evidence to support that”

                      You are correct sir. What I have is circumstantial evidence, and I use it to support my THEORY. That’s the other thing, when this is all said and done… IT IS JUST A THEORY.

                      So we disagree about something. What else is new?

                      Jeffro, I apologize for letting my emotions get the better of me and resorting to name-calling. I respect you and your opinion and look forward to our next debate.

                    • it’s all good.

                    • and i didn’t realize they were hitting the theater/blu-ray THAT close together, but, thor does come out 1st, even earlier in other countries.

                    • ^^ All the more reason to make sure it has action sequences comparable to what the competition is offering

  10. Trailers just don’t do it for me anymore. Draagyn has a point, whoever makes or redubes these dialogue trailers either add stuff out of context, or we’ll never see it in the movie. Plus trailers gives too much away; I miss the old days of teasers and having no clue what to expect. I’ll probably wait to see this on Blu-Ray with all the next extra features.

  11. I’m just as pumped for this sequel as most of you guys.

    I just hope that they kill of Jane (and her floating in mid-air in front of Malekith and the person collapsing with Thor crying out helplessly doesn’t turn out to be a trailer-bluff).

    Also, they should ‘get rid of’ Loki, thereby ensuring the completion of his redemption arc. It should seem as though he betrayed Thor only for someone else (probably the big bad) to stab him in the back. I’m well aware that he’s a fan favorite. I appreciate Hiddleston’s nuanced performance as much as the next guy, too. But he’s simply be overused, should he reach the threequel.

    Since I haven’t read any of the comics, I’d like to direct a question at all experts: would a trickster like Loki and a mortal like Jane end up in Valhalla according to the COMIC BOOK mythology? I’m asking because none of them is a warrior but maybe an honorable, self-sacrificial death could represent ‘extenuating circumstances’.

    • * kill off
      ** he’s = he’d

    • Loki will be in 3 more films.

      • Seriously? Where did you hear this, My Mom? To me this seems like he’s overstaying his on-screen welcome.

      • Really? I don’t know why fans love him so much I want more Lady Sif!

        • That was my reasoning for offing Jane. Then, by Thor 3, they could establish a love triangle between Hammer Time, Sif and Enchantress, should they choose to include the latter. And I’m sure they could come up with a way to instill much more plot importance into these two love interests. I feel like Foster fell flat in that department.

          • That would be great

            • Just spitballing here. But maybe Enchantress could be in cahoots with Surtur and as a woman scorned (as I think, Thor would and should ultimately go for Sif) she could very well bring about Ragnarok.

              • Exactly the premise I’ve been thinking of. Amora and the Executioner would be great additions to the universe.

  12. Any Beta Ray Bill mentions for the future?