As time passes, I care less for the Marvel Cinematic Universe (aka MCU). It has been hard to draw my attention toward their new projects because the people in charge botch them in one way or another. And in other instances, it feels too derivative and trite. For example, “WandaVision” started fascinating and genuinely engaging, but was ultimately drowned out in its MCU lore. The rest of its Phase 4 projects (“Eternals,” “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings,” “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” etc) have been, for the most part, very lackluster and without aim. However, in my opinion, there is one exception: Sam Raimi’s “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” — which I enjoyed way more than I anticipated with its pantomime action set pieces and telenovela-esque dramatic performances (and I mean this in a positive way).
Marvel Phase 4 Struggles to Find its Footing
Nevertheless, it does feel like its current phase has no shape, form, or direction. Feige and crew are throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. And most of it hasn’t landed (or at least properly). The projects also feel rushed, noticeable from their vapid narratives to their extremely poor CGI. And their latest feature into the MCU’s fourth phase, coincidentally being the fourth Thor installment, “Thor: Love and Thunder,” suffers from those same problems while adding plenty more on top of them. Plenty of people say that Taika Waititi’s “Ragnarok” saved the Thor franchise. And although that may be true to an extent, I still think the first film in 2011 was rather enjoyable. Kenneth Branagh knew what he was doing. He blended the Marvel Comics’ hero with a “Xanadu”-esque plotline and ended up with a Shakespearian affair with comedy attached.
That combination sounds ridiculous, but that’s what its makers intend. But when “Thor: Love and Thunder” was announced, I found myself interested. The logo looked to be ’80s-centered — like much of today’s pop culture phenomena, hence “Stranger Things.” But also I could sense the “Conan the Barbarian” (1982), “Flash Gordon” (1980), “Battle Beyond the Stars” (1980), and “Star Crash” (1978) vibes from it. I could see it in my imagination: a self-aware ridiculous affair that’s funny, charming in its own wonky way, and had some sense of flash in-between its absurdity. This sensation there would be another fresh take on the Norse mythology-inspired Marvel god motivated me, even if I wasn’t a fan of Waititi’s work. And although some of those elements are smeared onto the film, “Thor: Love and Thunder” is unamusingly bloated. It contains no spark in its romantic affairs, nor its action set pieces.
Exposition Dumps and Over-Explaining
The movie centers around a being called Gorrr, aka “the God Butcher” (played by Christian Bale). He’s killing gods left and right because of an injustice that life threw his way — the loss of his daughter. Gorr sought vengeance for his loss as his means to grieve and vowed that no god would stand before him and the Necrosword. When he makes his way to Asgard, he encounters Thor (Chris Hemsworth), who instantaneously wants a bloodbath and summons creatures from the shadows to kill the Asgardian people and knights. Soon enough, Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson) and a mysterious helper, who’s helming Thor’s ex-weapon, Mjölnir, come out and try to stop him. Who’s this secretive companion? It’s Dr. Jane Foster, aka The Mighty Thor (Natalie Portman)! While they keep fighting their way through the creatures, Gorr manages to kidnap the kids and take them to the shadow realm (or planet).
The rest centers around quick adventures as they make their way to the god Eternity before it’s too late. “Love and Thunder” has a structure that causes headaches even after finishing; its concoction is simple yet vexatious. It’s one-part exposition dumps, and another dull and humdrum action set-pieces. After a quick prologue to set the main villain, the film offers an almost 8-minute exposition dump to ensure the audience knows where Thor is currently. Then we see an action sequence involving the Guardians of the Galaxy. The film writes them as though A.I. version of themselves. They have zero of the charisma, charm, and wit they had in their respective films. And this sequence goes on for about 120-minutes. I get Taika wanted people to know precisely what was happening and how things were set up before the film’s actual beginning (the pristine adventure).
‘Love and Thunder’ Struggles to Know What Picture it Wants to Be
Yet, it gets outlandish when they over-explain everything time and again. The film includes these exposition dumps to “make sure” the audience knows what’s happening (or what will happen next). Trust me, Taika, we know! It begins to sour your viewing experience each time it happens. The film meanders too much on explaining every plotline twice or three times instead of making things happen. It says rather than doing for most of its run-time; which isn’t bad on its own, because it could have been a more conversational picture, but the dialogue is so daft and shoddy I preferred it did something else entirely. So, because of said issues, one relies on the action sequences and story concepts to intrigue. Yet, that as well feels half-hearted. Some of “Love and Thunder’s” action sequences contain quick editing and odd cinematography, so you don’t even know what is happening.
And taking into consideration the poor color grading, that makes things even worse. Regarding its concepts, it tries to explore themes that would be interesting to see in a popcorn movie. With the characters of Gorr and The Mighty Thor, the film develops fascinating juxtapositions between love and loss and the certification that without pain, you can’t have love. Both of them take potent forms of their own to make them feel as if they were the greatest beings in the world, but they are still grieving and suffering on the inside. In addition, the film talks about grieving, meeting old flames, accepting one’s fate (the talk of Valhalla), false gods, religion — amongst other things. However, these are at face value. Taika wants to dedicate time to tomfoolery and pantomimist idiocy instead of developing these concepts. Its one-note comedic panderings undercut any attempt at creating an emotional story arc.
Some Amusing Cameos, Though…
You could cut some slack if it were a hilarious picture, but it isn’t. All its jokes fall flat, ranging from constantly screaming goats to on-the-nose Old Spice commercials for product placement. But some of its ridiculousness works. Matt Damon makes an appearance once again as the stage-play Loki, which made me chuckle. My personal highlight of the film was Russell Crowe as Zeus, who was tremendously entertaining to watch. Crowe isn’t known for doing impressions or accents. However, here he sounds like Sacha Baron-Cohen’s Borat as he babbles about space orgies and nudity. I was both laughing with it and at it. Unfortunately, what’s left of the film is just mediocrity and dullness of the highest order. Taika made plenty of off-ball and risky decisions while making “Thor: Love and Thunder,” but none of them paid off in the grand scheme of things.
After “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness,” I thought I would engage with the MCU again, but it was a honeymoon phase that only lasted two months or so. What annoys me the most is that these projects have potential, believe it or not. Sam Raimi proved you could blend the Feige structure with directorial vision while exploring themes and entertaining your audience. However, since it is all about pumping out content, they don’t handle it properly. Taika wanted to do “Thor: Ragnarok”-redux. What he did with Led Zeppelin in “Ragnarok,” replicate it in “Love and Thunder,” but with Guns n’ Roses (one of the most overrated bands in rock history, if you’d ask me).
Some Positives Emerge
And it doesn’t transition well because, from beginning to end, there’s no disparity of originality in its direction and pen. There’s no magic or magnetism to one of the most colorful and lively superheroes Marvel has to offer. There are some positives amidst the disastrous concoction. Hemsworth and Portman have great chemistry together, Thompson is a fantastic screen presence (I would have rather seen a film centered around her character), and again, Crowe steals the show for me. But, for what it’s worth in the end, “Thor: Love and Thunder” doesn’t have much to offer as both a romance depicting loss and grief or an action blockbuster. It comes and goes with no substance or entertainment — a work in shambles of its own creator.
“Thor: Love and Thunder” is currently only available to watch in theaters.
Support the Site: Consider becoming a sponsor to unlock exclusive, member-only content and help support The Movie Buff!
