‘Thor’ Review

Published 4 years ago by , Updated October 5th, 2011 at 5:07 pm,

thor movie reviews Thor Review
Screen Rant’s Vic Holtreman reviews Thor

While I suppose Fast Five has claimed the early bird title of the film that kicked off the U.S. 2011 summer movie season, Thor is starting off what will be a summer heavy with superhero films. The question on everyone’s mind is will it start things off with a bang or a whimper?

Overall the story is pretty straightforward: Thor is the favored son of Odin over brother Loki, Thor is not shy about his position (poor self-esteem is NOT one of his problems), he disobeys his father, bringing danger to Asgard, is banished, and must somehow become “worthy” in order to regain his place (and power) in the kingdom.

Banishment sends Thor (Chris Hemsworth) to Earth – specifically to the outskirts of a very small town in New Mexico and into the company of Jane Foster (Natalie Portman). Jane is an astrophysicist whose research lies outside the mainstream – she’s a bit of a free spirit (for a scientist). Working with her is a veteran scientist  played by Stellan Skarsgård and a young, annoyingly goofy assistant played by Kat Dennings. They come upon the relatively de-powered Thor and can’t seem to separate themselves from his company.

Thor’s arrival was followed by that of the mighty Mjolnir, his magic-imbued (or here, in the film, more science than magic) hammer. Mjolnir comes to the attention of S.H.I.E.L.D. and our favorite man in black, Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg). Mjolnir can only be lifted/used by those who are worthy, and due to his being cast out, Thor is not able to retrieve it from the compound surrounding it.

Meanwhile, his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is in Asgard and up to no good. He eventually delivers a message to Thor that leaves our erstwhile hero completely disheartened and resigned to his fate – to live out the rest of his life as a mere mortal on Earth.

The film has two very distinct personalities: Asgard (and the celestial realm) – and Earth (specifically, small town New Mexico). When the film is in Asgard and points beyond, it is completely engaging and engrossing. Complaints about how silly the costumes/armor looked in early photos will vanish, as they look like they completely belong. While there is a bit of humor, there is no tongue-in-cheek to be found in these off-world locations, and I for one was very thankful for that.

tom hiddleston thor Thor Review

Tom Hiddleston as Loki in 'Thor'

Asgard is where the movie really shines, and it is there that Tom Hiddleston, as Loki, steals the film. Director Kenneth Branagh coaxes a nuanced performance from him that is very far from a mustache-twirling villain. He is not just conflicted – you can actually be tempted to take his side despite the dark path he follows. He just does an amazing job and will probably be a lot of folks’ favorite character from the film.

Anthony Hopkins is as regal and powerful as ever – and when early on he puts Thor in his place with a mighty bellow you’ll feel like maybe you should shut the heck up and pay attention as well. Ray Stevenson as “bulky” warrior Volstag is nigh unrecognizable under all that beard and hair but he plays the boisterous soldier well and with a touch of fun. Jaimie Alexander is a believable female warrior and acquits herself well – playing it strong while still seeming a lady.

A contender for “favorite character” in the film will be Idris Elba as Heimdall, the sentry and gatekeeper of Asgard. He is not on screen very long, but he’s a commanding presence every time he appears. He has a regal, noble, powerful sense about him that commands and holds your attention, and you’ll be wishing he had more screen time in the movie.

idris elba heimdall thor Thor Review

Idris Elba as Heimdall in 'Thor'

And then we have the part of the story that takes place on Earth. This is where the trademark Marvel movie humor was injected into the film, and for me, much of it was overly goofy and overused. There were a couple of funny moments that were a bit more restrained that I enjoyed (a post-drinking scene between Hemsworth and Skarsgård was short, subtle and quite funny).

The tone for the humor in the film was set right from the opening, which had me groaning and concerned for what might come during the course of the movie. I found the opening scene semi-ludicrous (imagine a tornado chaser wanting to drive right INTO the tornado, that also has a lightning storm happening inside it), and the sophomoric humor brought to the first few scenes courtesy of Dennings’ character left me cold (although the audience I was with seemed to enjoy it). Things evened out over time (thankfully), but still, parts of the movie that took place on Earth left me yearning for a return to Asgard.

To his credit, Chris Hemsworth did a fine job playing the supremely arrogant Thor – arrogant even without his super-powers. He softened by the end of the film (a bit too suddenly, I think) but he was believable on both sides of the personality shift. He was very charming even in his arrogance. Natalie Portman didn’t really have a lot to do here and seemed like she could have been played by most any attractive young thirty-something actress – nothing really of note in her performance. Then again, she really wasn’t given much to do.

chris hemsworth thor1 Thor Review

Chris Hemsworth as the de-powered Thor

Asgard interiors looked amazing, although the exteriors looked a little to “Star Wars prequel” for my taste. The design they came up with for the rainbow bridge was both impressive (you try making a “rainbow bridge” real) and effective. Another great design was that of the gateway – very visually interesting in both appearance and function. Jotunheim, the planet of the Frost Giants was appropriately vast and barren, although the monstrous creature seen in the trailers looked a bit CGI-ish.

There were multiple battles throughout the film to keep action-lovers sated, and although the final battle on Earth seemed a bit disappointing, the early battle with the Frost Giants from Jotunheim and a final face-off in Asgard are pretty damned epic. Especially in the former you definitely get a sense of the incredible power of Thor. If I have any complaints it’s that the fight scenes were shot in that uber-annoying, close-in, super-choppy-editing style. The darkness in some of the scenes compounded with the darkening of the 3D glasses/effects made some of it look extremely murky.

Speaking of 3D, while I think the concept of post-production 3D is terrible (if you’re going to make a 3D movie, SHOOT it using 3D cameras), I didn’t see any of the usual telltale signs of after-the-fact 3D: the back of an actor’s head floating apart from his face, the look of 2D layers separated by artificial depth, etc. On the other hand, there’s nothing much here to make this worth seeing in 3D. If you can see it in 2D, I recommend you just do that instead.

For the Marvel fans, the appearance of Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye in the film seemed superfluous – it was there more as a tie-in to the Avengers movie and as a little Easter egg for you. Yes, they did incorporate Thor’s alter-ego Donald Blake into the film in a offhand and creative way – and I will not spoil for you how Thor used his hammer and whether it matched his use of Mjolnir in the comics. icon smile Thor Review

Overall, Thor was a very enjoyable ride that combined epic action and scenery, but not at the expense of letting the audience get to know some great characters. Right now I’d say this is probably the second best Marvel-produced superhero movie, behind the first Iron Man.

If you want to talk freely about the film without worrying about spoiling it for others, please head on over to our Thor Spoilers Discussion.

Here’s a trailer for Thor:


[poll id="151"]

Our Rating:

3.5 out of 5
(Very Good)

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. 3.5 out of 5 is what I expected Vic, THanks. Going to see it with the family tonight.

  2. Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston and Heimdall were great as Thor, Loki and Heimdall, respectively.

    I did like the Earth fish out of water humor but it did get a bit too silly sometimes.

    The special effects were simply amazing this film.

    Loved the plot, perfect mix of SHIELD interference without weakening the story.

    • Jaimie Alexander as Sif was just great. Very believable and like the subtle hints of her affections for Thor.

    • Heimdall as Heimdall? I need to call Idris Elba and tell him someone stole his role. :-D

      • Idris Elba was so convincing, he “became” Heimdall. :)

      • Typo, but a great typo :)

  3. Thanks for the review Vic sounds great I’ll be in line once my wisdom teeth heal up

  4. My god has a hammer…tonight after work.

  5. I hope it is as good as you say since I will be seeing this movie three times with three different set of friends.

    On a side note, has anyone noticed that when the story is set in the proper setting be it fantasy or scifi, that when it is forced back to Earth is where it always seems lacking?

    • Iv already seen it 3 times… online and ill be watching it in theatres tonight to support Marvel!!

  6. “and the sophomoric humor brought to the first few scenes courtesy of Dennings’ character left me cold (although the audience I was with seemed to enjoy it).” My exact thoughts while i was sitting in the theater unamused all the females around me started giggling/laughing at half-hearten humor.

    The bland humor at the beginning had me worried the likes of tasing Thor and the references to Facebook and the childish humor made me cringe in my seat but thankfully as the movie progressed they moved away from it.

    Overall I also would have given it 3.5 stars well done on the movie

    • meant to say well done marvel on the movie

  7. Nice review Vic, cant wait to see it :)

  8. I saw at 12:01 am this morning. It was defintely a fun ride. I have to agree with most of the review and the score.

    My biggest complaint was the flow of the film. Things seem to move too fast and when it slowed up it was on the more uninteresting parts to me.

    Still, the film was solid, it had some amazing special effects, the acting was delivered well(for the most part). All in all, go see this film.

  9. Saw it yesterday it was good, not great, but good. The only part that made me laughed was the comment made at the warriors three. Loki’s character really stood out for me. There was great casting throughout the film.

  10. Excellent review, it’s almost creepy how I agree with you on all the points. I said the same thing (almost word for word) about Portman’s part, for me she was just there. And the earth scenes were lacking, I thought the whole middles section could have been better. But overall, I enjoyed the movie a lot :)

  11. I’m very VERY disappointed to learn that my local theater is showing this in ONLY 3D. I friggin hate 3D. But, I already made plans to see this with a few friends after work and I won’t back out on them. Stinks that I would have to drive 30 minutes to see this in the better (and cheaper) 2D version. If I hadn’t already made the plans to see this, I would be holding off until I was near a 2D theater or until it comes out on Blu-Ray. Very disheartened that the local theater is not giving people the choice of 2D or 3D. The worst part is they are using TWO theaters for the 3D. Use one for 3D and one for 2D. Let people make a choice!!!

    • That seriously sucks. I got over 3-D after a couple of movies, and then Avatar was incredible. But there is no way I’d see this in 3-D. I’ve only heard and read bad things about the 3-D.

      • This has me wondering if I am going to bother to see Cap, GL, X-Men or Transformers if it’s only going to be shown locally in 3D. By the time those films are released, gas will be $5/gal which will keep me from driving out of town to see the movies. I’ll just wait for the Blu-Ray release and watch it in the comfort of my own living room….IN 2D!!

        • See if you can talk others into carpooling.

  12. Agreed, Vic. Good movie, and I thought it was cool seeing Hawkeye. Also, the after-credit scene made me even more excited for 2012.

  13. 3.5 out of 5? Come on screenrant! You guys gave this movie the same rating as Fast 5? Fast 5 was terrible and this movie wasn’t. Please reconsider… or at least make it like 3.75 out 5. PLEASE!


    • TheAvenger,

      Our scoring system doesn’t do 1/4 stars. I wavered between a 3.5 and a 4, and overall I couldn’t justify giving it a 4.


      • Think on it some more, dude. You could give it a four. Think like a fan.

        • That’s right Vic, toss your morals and obligation to be objective out the window and just give everything you “want” to be good 5 stars!

      • I’m leaning towards 4 but you’re the boss. Thought they did a good job of getting in all the history AND establishing the Avengers connection too.
        Also thought it was a nice departure for Portman. She was cute.

    • Fast 5 was not terrible.

  14. Heard this movie was terrible by a couple of friends who saw the midnight showing. Might save my money on this one and wait for dvd, which I was NOT expecting to say months ago on this very site.

    • Taylor,

      What kind of movies do you enjoy? You’re reading Vic’s review, which is positive, and most critics (who usually hate these movies) also liked the film. Go see it and make your own judgment and opinion on it. If you detest comic book movies, I guess stay away.

    • I’d probably wait for this one too, but I want to be able to participate in the discussions this summer since there are so many SH movies to compare.

      Currently Thor is maintaining a lead against Hobo with a Shotgun over at RT. 80% seems a lot more realistic to me, but that’s still a good 10-15% higher than I expected.

    • Taylor, I think your friends are in a very, VERY small minority with that sentiment. Every person I know who’s seen it and the vast majority of the reviewers at least say it’s “good.”

      The debate comes when some say it’s “great” :)

      I’d recommend this being something you check out in theaters although, like Vic says, you don’t need to see it in 3d.

  15. ok as a BIG thor fan doesn’t it bother no one here that marvel comics would misuse the essence of the destroyer here. I mean come on, thor has always been my fav superhero but there is no way he can beat the destroyer…..

    • agreed. if I remember wasnt the destroyer created by the “gods” (Odin, Zeus..) to oppose the Celestials if they ever came around? Anyways, no way could anything beat it, even Thor.

      • Hulk can beat it. HULK IS THE STRONGEST ONE THERE IS!

        • You know, I thought the same thing, until I read about the Destroyer armor. I don’t think Hulk would stand a chance.

  16. Yes, very excellent review Vic, you outline the good and bad points very well.

    I thought it was a throughly entertaining and at times exciting movie. I would actually put it just above Iron Man in terms of the league of great superhero movies. It hit the right balance of action and humour for most of the time. I give so much credit to Kenneth Branagh for taking the subject matter seriously and bringing a near perfect visualisation onto the screen.

    Yes, the movie worked best in Asgard, in fact the first twenty minutes were truly epic and actually threatened to be a masterpiece in the same vein of Lord Of The Rings. (The Frost Giant battle bordered on incredible along with the rainbow bridge) I just feel it needed a continious good hour in Asgard. From Thor’s ascent, coronation, to banishment, it all came about too birefly.

    The actors were perfect in their roles. I was sceptical with the casting of Hemsworth, but am now fully convinced. He has made the character his own the same way as Downey Jnr and Christopher Reeve did in their respective characters. For all the quality of Huddlestone’s performance, I didn’t think that Loki was quite villainous enough. He never carried that true threatening sense of evil about him, that I thought he would have.

    There are some films that could’ve benefitted from a longer running time, and Thor was definitely one of those. The burden of being a summer blockbuster eventually showed, bringing about the dreaded rushed final act that many people have discussed on this site. The Destroyer in particular was a disappointing, not having the impact that I expected it would.

    Whilst not quite as good as the one in Iron Man 2, the end credits scene certainly interesting enough to see where they go with Avengers next year.

    Overall I think it deserved 4 out of 5.

    Still can’t decide who was prettier, Portman or Alexander.

  17. Sounds like I’m going to pass based on the review. Never was a fan of thor anyways. Was never feeling it since before the trailer.

  18. Raise the Hammer of the god of Thunder, this movie is a SMASH.
    Dont miss it. The movie is a alot of fun.

  19. Good review, I would agree to 90% Vic, and good movie too in my view.

    One big downer was the change of character in 2 days Thor is going through…a bit too fast too much, that was the only point where the movie lost a bit of credibility.

    Otherwise I think the humour level was just about right, good effects+action and I was not sure if the 3D was post or shot in 3D so they did a good job on the post conversion -> you can go see it in 3D without complaining afterwards.

    Portman was a waste of talent, sadly. She could have brought so much more to the movie….maybe in a sequel?

    By the way, am I the only one who headed straight to the gym after seeing Thors “shape” :) (although a bit too bulky), damn…..


    • I didn’t find that too off the mark. Being banished, having your life and power stripped away, only to be followed my news of your dad’s death, your mother disowning you and your brother telling you there’s no hope of ever coming back, FOLLOWED by innocents being attacked within 24 hours would change a man ;)

      • Sheesh, Rob, could you at least have thrown a spoiler alert in there! Some of us haven’t seen it yet!! :o

    • I headed straight to my local pub to smash some beer glasses and bellow “THAT WAS GOOD: BRING ME ANOTHER!”

      Not as popular in real life, that one…

  20. Still on the fence about seeing this one in theaters. From a different source, 3.5 would sound fair and right around what I was expecting. But considering how partial Screen Rant is to comic book movies, the rating doesn’t bode very well.

    I guess what it will have to come down to is whether or not I can get a few extra bucks and hours into my pocket within the next couple of weeks.

    • Screen Rant might be partial to comic book movies, but I find that the reviews are pretty fair, be it Vic, Rob, Kofi, etc. writing the review. Besides, it’s not only Vic giving this a good review, other sites are as well. As a matter of fact, after reading some other reviews, I think Vic might be a bit TOO hard with his review. Just shows that SR has higher standards for a comic book movie. :D

      • I very much agree that the reviews on this site are very, very fair. However, the reason that I brought up Screen Rant’s partiality to comic book movies is that a lower than 4 star review seems to be a bad omen to me. If I read a review by Pete Travers of Rolling Stone that gave Thor 3.5/5, I would think “Hmm, this might be good.” But, Pete Travers is not partial to comic book movies, has no stake in the genre, and probably wouldn’t care if it disappeared entirely. One can clearly see reading through articles on the site that Screen Rant and Vic, on the other hand, wanted very much to be blown away by Thor. They care about the genre, and want it to succeed. As such, a 3.5 grade for a movie like Thor from Screen Rant is like a 2 star review anywhere else.

        • Hey Vincent,

          Actually I’m glad you brought this up – behind the scenes we’ve been talking about eliminating some of the partiality we’ve shown to films in some genres in the past because they’re good/great for that genre and going to a more even, across the board rating system.

          So 3.5/5 IS good as far as we’re concerned, just not great – and I did waver between a 3.5 and a 4 for Thor.


        • Vincent I’m gonna have to disagree. I say if anything Vics love of comics made be even harsher on the film. If you think that this is bad because he gave it a good review and that makes you think others would bash it I highly recommend you check out Rottentomatoes.com. The movie is getting great reviews from some highly respected critic. Vic is pretty much right on with most and in fact is even rating it lower than some. I don’t know about you and I can’t speak for Vic, but I’m a little harsher on comic films than most genres because of my love of comics. I’m less accepting of mediocre when it comes to comics because I want to see great films of the things I love.

          • Daniel,

            You seem to have gotten the impression that I’m criticizing Vic’s review, but I most certainly am not. I think that it’s very fair, and well-written.

            My view is purely from the perspective of someone who was on the fence about the movie, being that I have an interest in comic book films, but I’m really not a fan of comics or action movies. The way I see it, if Vic, who is more prone to like the movie than I am, thinks that it was “good not great,” then I am not all that likely to enjoy it very much.

            All that said, my lady was in need of cheering up last night, so I took her to dinner and a movie…Naturally, we saw Thor. Personally, I’m going to have to agree that it was good, not great. I’d say that it was more or less on par with the first Iron Man movie in terms of script and character development. The only thing that I would say makes Iron Man better is Robert Downey Jr.

            • Vincent,

              I’m glad that in the end your opinion of the film ended up matching my review. :)


        • Hey Vic,
          Who wants to rant about movies like “The King’s Voice?”
          My 2 cents only, but the Sci Fi/Comic book world is probably the only place you’ll get fans of this caliber and nature to give a rats patooee!

  21. Not too surprised the Earth scenes were lacking, as it seemed as Branaugh originally were considering making Thor an Asgard-only setting for the first movie, a la Captain America’s first movie being set only in WWII. Guess maybe they should have gone that route after all.

    Spilled milk and all that.

  22. Honestly, I think this was the best Marvel movie to date. I loathed Thor in the comics, but the movie version was phenomenal.

    Personally, I found the humor to add to the movie rather than take away.

    Basically, I found Iron Man to be an amazing film because of RDJ. If he was replaced, than Iron Man might have been a shiny film with a bland story.

    With Thor, we get a basic story, but entertaining through and through. Chris had an amazing performance, but he didn’t have to carry the movie as much as RDJ.

  23. I agree with just about everything you said, but I feel it deserves a 4/5 instead. I disliked the same stuff you did, but less than you did and I liked the same stuff you did, but more than you did apparently. I thought it was very good and I’d classify it as Marvels second best film, but I don’t think Ironman was the best. I enjoyed Thor more than Ironman, but less than Incredible Hulk which i thought was a much better film all around. Iron man fell apart int he third act so horribly and it ruined the film over all for me. Incredible Hulk was fantastic all the way through and I had trouble finding any flaws in it. For me Thor sits in the middle of the two and has a 4/5.

    • perfectly worded, i enthusiastically share that opinion

  24. I was shocked by home good it was, great acting all around, the destroyer armour was in just enough for it not to turn into Iron Man.

    The humour was a good touch, couple of laugh out loud moments :-)

    Now i have to wait for ages for number 2

  25. Better than I thought it was going to be – thoroughly enjoyed it. I’d agree with pretty much every aspect you raise for and against, Vic.

    Chris Hemsworth played a Thor I found fundamentally likeable even at his most headstrong and arrogant, and that’s not easy to do. Traditionally in these kind of movies the hero tends to come away looking like a bland poster-boy, or an interchangeable figurehead for some nebulous concept of “good”, especially in contrast to a colourful villain. That wasn’t the case here. Idris Elba’s almost spookily detached performance as Heimdall created a noble, quite literally otherworldly character, fascinating and worthy of myth. I was one of those rooting for Brian Blessed as Odin when the casting was first announced; in the end Anthony Hopkins was definitely the right choice: Ray Stevenson managed to stay the right side of camp for his Volstagg – Blessed lacks Hopkins’s subtleties and probably would have appeared like some kind of bellowing pantomime dame in the midst of how Branagh depicted Asgard and its hierarchy.

    Talking of which, I was impressed with the scale, intricacy and beauty of Asgard. I don’t want to start yet another anti-Star Wars Prequel punchup, but I think the essential difference was that although the former’s exteriors were even more stylised than the latter’s, they actually looked properly inhabited for all that, and not just vista after vista of overdesigned gubbins thrown onto the screen for the sake of establishing an offworld background. This was where I found the 3-D a real liability: the conversion played havoc with the contrast of those scenes and I couldn’t concentrate on the details of what I was actually seeing. It kind of took me out of the film, which was presumably not the effect they were after…

    Can anyone explain to me why that happens in a 3-D conversion? I know the glasses are darkening things to some extent, but the battle with the Frost Giants was so murky I could barely make out who was doing what to whom, and taking them on or off didn’t make much difference there. The one and only time I didn’t wish I was watching the movie in good old humble 2-D was the Destroyer’s energy beam tearing up the street towards screen right and flipping a car over. Now that had proper depth and immediacy to it – not simply a false perception of foreground/background and/or stuff being flung out of the screen at you. Helped along by some fearsome sound design for the thing powering up and firing. I wasn’t so impressed with the score though. Not bad, did the job, just not memorable.

    I thought Branagh held things together well. Nice balance of epic and intimate; solid performances from a good ensemble cast; not straying too far towards either fantasy or sci-fi – even down to Natalie Portman quoting the Arthur C Clarke line about any sufficiently advanced technology being indistinguishable from magic. Same goes for the production design: elements of Kirby in architecture and the armour (Heimdall’s especially) without descending into baroque madness or caricature. The Asgardians had a look unique and modern, though still ancient and familiar. The “biker pants” thing instead of leg armour even lent the outfits an air of the same 19th century military uniforms Branagh used in his film version of Hamlet, if that makes any sense. In the context of the movie all the obsessing over the details (and I’m as guilty of that as anyone) in this case seemed completely irrelevant.

    One last thing: loved the way Mjolnir was used in battle. The wrong director could have made that look ridiculous and embarrassing. Another thumbs-up for Ken on that one.

    • That’s another: Thor’s speech patterns were suitably…odd without appearing at all stilted or too Shakespearian “olde worlde”. Again, the wrong director or screenwriter could have milked that to death in the Eartbound scenes.

      Oh, and “elements of Kirby in THE architecture”, that should be.

    • Very well said BigD..Bravo!!

      • Cheers! :-)

  26. im definitely thinking im gonna have to check this movie out. it looks really good!!!

  27. I really enjoyed this one, it really was engaging, I was really taken in by it, I knew Branagh would do a good job on this. I agree that when Thor came to earth its as you where saying somehow with the transition of Asgard to earth,, there was something that I cant put my finger on it, it could be from one amazing envoirment like Asgard to mexico dessert border town. Maybe Branagh was trying to get across the immense fall of grace of Thor been surrounded my such grander to then be faced with human basics, of a village, people, community. I really loved the whole Asgard scenes, Anthony Hopkins, doing a great Job of a God the Father Like role,, Branagh does a great job on the knights and armor and dialog He’s terrific at that he really is, I love his work he goes into great detail and loves film immencley, he is superior and a master craftsman when it comes to films that involve kingship,magisty,intellect.Overall I loved this one, its one of the strongest from marvel Asgard was just so magnicint thats why I think when Thor came to earth, you where already rooting for him a the back of your mind to get back to Asgard,, so in a sense the two places earth and Asgard where really competing maybe,, But I loved this very much,, I cant wait for a few more

  28. I felt the same way with Loki. Part of me almost wanted him to succeed with his plans. Tom Hiddleston stole the show.

    • I kind of felt… wanted, everyone to win – on the one side we know Thor is the hero but for some reason (maybe because he’s a jerk at the start) you’re rooting for Loki, but on the other hand… if Loki becomes king… bad things are gonna start happening so you root for Thor. Good thing Loki isn’t dead (oops, spoiler alert;))

  29. great movie cant wait for captain america, and the avengers. i just hope they do not leave us hanging with the leader being created and left out. bring on the LEADER.