Thor: The Dark World (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Empire Admin -> Thor: The Dark World (23/10/2013 12:06:39 AM)

Post your comments on this article




THERAHMAN -> 4 stars ?? (23/10/2013 12:06:40 AM)

4 stars ??? really ?




UTB -> RE: 4 stars ?? (23/10/2013 8:43:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: THERAHMAN

4 stars ??? really ?



Yeah but mainly for the Thor out of Thive joke.




MonsterCat -> RE: Thor: The Dark World (23/10/2013 11:18:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: THERAHMAN

4 stars ??? really ?


Are you Thor about this?




MikeTheActorMan -> Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 11:56:52 AM)

Yay for the positive review of this, I'm even more excited to see it now!

But "but this isn’t the city-smashing snoozefest that mired Man Of Steel’s climax" is a bit... wtf? Man of Steel is AWESOME and had such amazing action sequences all throughout, how can you say that it was a snooze-fest? One of the best films I've seen all year!




Cool Breeze -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 12:02:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeTheActorMan

Yay for the positive review of this, I'm even more excited to see it now!

But "but this isnít the city-smashing snoozefest that mired Man Of Steelís climax" is a bit... wtf? Man of Steel is AWESOME and had such amazing action sequences all throughout, how can you say that it was a snooze-fest? One of the best films I've seen all year!


And didnt they give Man Of Steel 4 stars?




MonsterCat -> RE: Thor: The Dark World (23/10/2013 12:32:36 PM)

I think it would save Empire and its moderators a lot of time and hassle if Empire put up this disclaimer: "Empire and its website does not run on a hive mind mentality. Due to the subjective nature of film, each staff member of Empire may have differing opinions on any given subject. So quit your bitching about different star ratings."




matty_b -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 12:44:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeTheActorMan

Yay for the positive review of this, I'm even more excited to see it now!

But "but this isnít the city-smashing snoozefest that mired Man Of Steelís climax" is a bit... wtf? Man of Steel is AWESOME and had such amazing action sequences all throughout, how can you say that it was a snooze-fest? One of the best films I've seen all year!


And didnt they give Man Of Steel 4 stars?


Do you still need this explaining to you? Really?

How you get up in the morning and tie your own shoelaces is beyond me. Unless you don't. Which wouldn't surprise me.




waltham1979 -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 1:21:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeTheActorMan

Yay for the positive review of this, I'm even more excited to see it now!

But "but this isnít the city-smashing snoozefest that mired Man Of Steelís climax" is a bit... wtf? Man of Steel is AWESOME and had such amazing action sequences all throughout, how can you say that it was a snooze-fest? One of the best films I've seen all year!


And didnt they give Man Of Steel 4 stars?


*sighs...and soul dies a little inside...*




Bobby TwoTimes -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 1:23:20 PM)

I would say the dig at Man Of Steel was because it was complete and utter shite!




horribleives -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 1:29:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeTheActorMan

Yay for the positive review of this, I'm even more excited to see it now!

But "but this isnít the city-smashing snoozefest that mired Man Of Steelís climax" is a bit... wtf? Man of Steel is AWESOME and had such amazing action sequences all throughout, how can you say that it was a snooze-fest? One of the best films I've seen all year!


He didn't, he said the climax was a snoozefest. And I imagine he said it because he thought it was a snoozefest.




horribleives -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 1:32:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: MikeTheActorMan

Yay for the positive review of this, I'm even more excited to see it now!

But "but this isnít the city-smashing snoozefest that mired Man Of Steelís climax" is a bit... wtf? Man of Steel is AWESOME and had such amazing action sequences all throughout, how can you say that it was a snooze-fest? One of the best films I've seen all year!


And didnt they give Man Of Steel 4 stars?



No, Dan Jolin did.
But even if the reviews were written by the same people the point could still stand - I'd probably give Man Of Steel 4 out of 5 too yet I also found the last half hour dull as fuck.




Filmfan 2 -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 2:32:40 PM)

I wonder how many pages of posts criticizing the film and its review we'll get to before anyone here has actually seen it?




BoDixen -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 2:37:45 PM)

Happy to see, that it seems Marvel learns a little and keep the running time below 2 hours and cut the final battle down.

Blockbusters right now are bloated and almost all reviews talks about loosing at least 20 min.

Man of Steel really suffers from this as well as Iron Man 3 and so forth.

Studios seem to think that people should feel they get their moneys worth and a longer running time with a long protracted conclusion is the answer even if the story don't require it.

Here's to hoping that trend will be broken.




James2183 -> RE: Thor: The Dark World (23/10/2013 3:07:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

I think it would save Empire and its moderators a lot of time and hassle if Empire put up this disclaimer: "Empire and its website does not run on a hive mind mentality. Due to the subjective nature of film, each staff member of Empire may have differing opinions on any given subject. So quit your bitching about different star ratings."


Nah, we obviously live for this [:D]

[:'(]




Cool Breeze -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 3:07:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoDixen

Happy to see, that it seems Marvel learns a little and keep the running time below 2 hours and cut the final battle down.

Blockbusters right now are bloated and almost all reviews talks about loosing at least 20 min.

Man of Steel really suffers from this as well as Iron Man 3 and so forth.

Studios seem to think that people should feel they get their moneys worth and a longer running time with a long protracted conclusion is the answer even if the story don't require it.

Here's to hoping that trend will be broken.


Man Of Steel was just over two hours wasnt it? I didnt find it too long at all and thought the last half hour was action packed and exciting.By this reviewers reasoning, Avengers Assemble must have been very boring for him as well.





horribleives -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 3:16:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoDixen

Happy to see, that it seems Marvel learns a little and keep the running time below 2 hours and cut the final battle down.

Blockbusters right now are bloated and almost all reviews talks about loosing at least 20 min.

Man of Steel really suffers from this as well as Iron Man 3 and so forth.

Studios seem to think that people should feel they get their moneys worth and a longer running time with a long protracted conclusion is the answer even if the story don't require it.

Here's to hoping that trend will be broken.


Man Of Steel was just over two hours wasnt it? I didnt find it too long at all and thought the last half hour was action packed and exciting.By this reviewers reasoning, Avengers Assemble must have been very boring for him as well.




Perhaps it was? Speaking personally, on the whole I enjoyed Man Of Steel and Avengers though I thought the climactic action sequences of both were thoroughly tedious. So I'm pleased to hear this may not be the case with the new Thor.




Cool Breeze -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 3:35:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoDixen

Happy to see, that it seems Marvel learns a little and keep the running time below 2 hours and cut the final battle down.

Blockbusters right now are bloated and almost all reviews talks about loosing at least 20 min.

Man of Steel really suffers from this as well as Iron Man 3 and so forth.

Studios seem to think that people should feel they get their moneys worth and a longer running time with a long protracted conclusion is the answer even if the story don't require it.

Here's to hoping that trend will be broken.


Man Of Steel was just over two hours wasnt it? I didnt find it too long at all and thought the last half hour was action packed and exciting.By this reviewers reasoning, Avengers Assemble must have been very boring for him as well.




Perhaps it was? Speaking personally, on the whole I enjoyed Man Of Steel and Avengers though I thought the climactic action sequences of both were thoroughly tedious. So I'm pleased to hear this may not be the case with the new Thor.


Empire rated Avengers Assemble their favourite film of 2012 so i assume that there was a group consensus in the office that they all liked it very much.Who knows?




horribleives -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 3:50:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoDixen

Happy to see, that it seems Marvel learns a little and keep the running time below 2 hours and cut the final battle down.

Blockbusters right now are bloated and almost all reviews talks about loosing at least 20 min.

Man of Steel really suffers from this as well as Iron Man 3 and so forth.

Studios seem to think that people should feel they get their moneys worth and a longer running time with a long protracted conclusion is the answer even if the story don't require it.

Here's to hoping that trend will be broken.


Man Of Steel was just over two hours wasnt it? I didnt find it too long at all and thought the last half hour was action packed and exciting.By this reviewers reasoning, Avengers Assemble must have been very boring for him as well.




Perhaps it was? Speaking personally, on the whole I enjoyed Man Of Steel and Avengers though I thought the climactic action sequences of both were thoroughly tedious. So I'm pleased to hear this may not be the case with the new Thor.


Empire rated Avengers Assemble their favourite film of 2012 so i assume that there was a group consensus in the office that they all liked it very much.Who knows?


What's that got to do with liking the climax of Man Of Steel? You're the only one suggesting if you find one boring one you must think the same of the other.
And I'm not sure how it works at Empire but at most magazines the writers submit, for instance, their top twenty albums, then each number one is awarded 20 points, number two 19 and so on. So just because it was number one doesn't necessarily mean everyone liked it.

Anyway, back to Thor: I'm no comic purist but I sincerely hope at some point he wears his bloody hat in this one.




Bobby TwoTimes -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 4:34:38 PM)

I don't really want to see shorter end battles, as long as they're good.

The last 45 minutes of The Matrix was the best end battle of the last 15yrs and if anything I wanted more. Man Of Steel was just shit!




waltham1979 -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 5:07:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Filmfan 2

I wonder how many pages of posts criticizing the film and its review we'll get to before anyone here has actually seen it?


I am never going to see it; as I hate comic book films and Marvel and Chris Hemsworth (the ugly shit). I am however going to sit on this review feed and criticize Empire's reviews. Bring up other films like Attack of the Clones, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and moan that they didn't show how Ben Affleck got back too Gotham.

Then I am going to chase small cats in my garden with a stick whilst in my Game of Thrones cosplay, lathered in warm baby oil, dancing to 'Slam Dunk the Funk' and hope the children who live next door aren't looking out of their window at the time...

None of the above is true.

Except for maybe the warm baby oil bit...




dseys -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (23/10/2013 5:13:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoDixen

Happy to see, that it seems Marvel learns a little and keep the running time below 2 hours and cut the final battle down.

Blockbusters right now are bloated and almost all reviews talks about loosing at least 20 min.

Man of Steel really suffers from this as well as Iron Man 3 and so forth.

Studios seem to think that people should feel they get their moneys worth and a longer running time with a long protracted conclusion is the answer even if the story don't require it.

Here's to hoping that trend will be broken.


The 1st Thor was also under 2 hours. A large-scale blockbuster that's over after 1h45 feels like a little movie where nothing has an impact. It's highly unsatisfying. Just like the 1st Thor, actually.




Filmfan 2 -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (24/10/2013 11:16:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: waltham1979


quote:

ORIGINAL: Filmfan 2

I wonder how many pages of posts criticizing the film and its review we'll get to before anyone here has actually seen it?


I am never going to see it; as I hate comic book films and Marvel and Chris Hemsworth (the ugly shit). I am however going to sit on this review feed and criticize Empire's reviews. Bring up other films like Attack of the Clones, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and moan that they didn't show how Ben Affleck got back too Gotham.

Then I am going to chase small cats in my garden with a stick whilst in my Game of Thrones cosplay, lathered in warm baby oil, dancing to 'Slam Dunk the Funk' and hope the children who live next door aren't looking out of their window at the time...

None of the above is true.

Except for maybe the warm baby oil bit...


[:D]




UTB -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (24/10/2013 11:59:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dseys

A large-scale blockbuster that's over after 1h45 feels like a little movie where nothing has an impact.



Isn't this the synopsis for all Marvel movies?




freddie205 -> I somehow doubt that Chris is in any way sorry. (24/10/2013 5:26:40 PM)

I feel that in fact, he is rather pleased with himself for that pun at the end.




tylerseven -> (25/10/2013 10:56:14 AM)

So "Gravity" will have more stars than the last comic-book piece of shit.
LOL





shanewire -> Smegload (25/10/2013 12:36:18 PM)

Brilliant




shanewire -> Smegload (25/10/2013 12:36:20 PM)

Brilliant




AxlReznor -> RE: Smegload (28/10/2013 10:28:19 AM)

Will be going to see this on Saturday. It certainly looks like it's going to be better than the original, which disappointed me after its first half hour by turning it into a fish-out-of-water comedy.

And for the record, I thought Man Of Steel was excellent all-round, with one of the most exciting climaxes of recent years. Not sure how anyone could find it dull myself. Ah well... looking forward to The Dark World far more than I assumed I would be. [:)]




Hood_Man -> RE: Why the dig at Man of Steel? (28/10/2013 10:54:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltham1979
I am never going to see it; as I hate comic book films and Marvel and Chris Hemsworth (the ugly shit).

Whaaa? Tall, blonde, blue-eyed, muscular, and has an Australian accent? Even Vinnie Jones' panties would drop at the sight of him.

I'm looking forward to this a bit, I wasn't too interested in the first film but I really enjoyed Avengers Assemble. Hopefully this is more like the latter.

[EDIT]

Erm, never mind, wasn't paying attention [sm=scared04.gif]




Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125