Thor: The Return of Cheesy Action Fantasy?
by Shawn Lampron | Wednesday, July 22, 2009
The use of this picture was necessary for several reasons. Firstly, it was just hilarious. Secondly, it illustrates how long it has been since that long ago era of the eighties when we were last treated to a big screen schlock treatment of fantasy. While fantasy novels were my love as a teenager, serious treatments of the genre tend to bore me. I checked out mentally after the first Lord of the Rings. At some point, it became a Discovery Channel special focusing on midgets trudging through the woods with snazzy special effects.
No, I’m not even looking for that loosely defined fantasy in the vein of Harry Potter. I’m looking for a return to oversexualized sword-swinging, scantily clad virgins, evil wizards who meet untimely ends and piss-poor acting by Austrian immigrants. Isn’t it time? Marvel Studios might just believe it is, my friends. Thor is coming upon us, a Marvel movie venture of their version of the Nordic thunder god.
The fact that the man pictured above is directing the movie should make you pause and give you hope. Kenneth Branagh is a classic Shakespearean actor who made his bread and butter in movie versions of Othello and As You Like It. Hell, he’s even branched out and portrayed Gilderoy Lockhart in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Unfortunately, he was also involved in Frankenstein with Robert Deniro and the horrific movie version of Wild, Wild West. Still, when all is said and done, the man is the most recognizable Shakespearean actor since Laurence Olivier, so he deserves some respect. However, given his spotty track record, can he handle Thor?
Chris Hemsworth, a virtual unknown, has been tapped to portray Thor. If he looks just a bit familiar, it might be because he had a minor part in the new Star Trek movie as George Kirk, the father of the eponymous James T. Kirk. Other than that, he’s been in some soap operas, but that’s about it. He’s young, he’s big, and he’s blonde, so physically, I suppose he’s a good choice. What he can do on the acting side of the game remains to be seen. He’s a bit young for the choice of an immortal, but much like the recent Green Lantern casting of Ryan Reynolds, they must be thinking long term. A younger star opens up the possibility of years worth of sequels in case of success.
Ah, Natalie Portman. I’m not sure how I feel about this one. I know Chris is a big fan of Garden State, but I haven’t seen it. Thus, the last movie I saw with Portman and enjoyed was The Professional. So, Portman joins Kirsten Dunst as an actress who I believe peaked pre-puberty. However, she’s got the combination of cutesy and hot that will work for the fanboy crowd and is the closest thing to a big name attached to this movie outside of the obligatory Samuel L. Jackson cameo. How her role as Thor’s love interest plays out remains to be seen.
Finally, we have Loki, Thor’s evil half-brother, being portrayed by Tom Hiddleston. This man is a virtual unknown to the point that he makes Hemsworth look like a big name. He’s a stage actor with plenty of experience, but how that translates to the big screen remains to be seen. He has a nice, sneaky look to him that will serve well visually as Loki, but he’s the x-factor to this movie. A good turn as Loki could go a long way to making this an enjoyable movie.
In the end, the rumors about this movie leave more questions than answers. Branagh has done well with low-budget classic material, but he’s suffered when the budget gets big. For a movie involving battles between gods with thunder and CGI trickery, this is a vehicle that could get anywhere from $150-$200 million if I had to venture a guess. Any guesses as to how this one will turn out? I’m having a hard time seeing how this material will translate to the screen and mesh with the other Marvel movies in order to have Thor in the Avengers movies. Thoughts?
Thou must reply! Verily!
Prev: U Can’t Touch Vader
Next: Gone Fishing: GF5 Off Until Tuesday