Each generation has its own "guilty pleasure" movies that can be called "serious". For those who go to the cinema to watch a Marvel (or DC) movie and then going out and are indignant about it, saying to themself (but no only) "How such movies can even be created?!?", I'd like to say: comics are fictional stories about fictional heroes, often with super-powers that have become a cultural phenomenon over time, and several film companies have decided that they can use them as the so called "golden hens" - as long as they bring money to the cinema studios, there will be movies based on comicbook stories. In the comic stories, children, teenagers, and a variety of nerds are most often in love, who are interested in all the curious details of the endless universes with entangled fates. Occasionally entertaining movies appear on the territory of the cinema, such as "The Avengers", the first "Guardians of the Galaxy", "Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice", "The Dark Knight", but still most of them remain movies that you can watch for a night, have so fun and that's all, movies with giant budgets and ever-increasing earnings. We're not talking about serious problems, provocations, depth of stories, and other reflections - these films are made for fun and that's it. In the second decade of the 21st Century, when even the babies know how to work with tablets, Marvel (and DC) are the favorite movies of the young, colorful and action-packed audience.
The two major companies (DC and Marvel) are always tempted to compete.In the first two parts of "Thor" the main characters with their complexes and conflicts from the Marvel universe were presented, and now, in the third story, dedicated to Thor and "The sunset of the Gods", the company chose an extremely unusual director - Taika Waititi.
In fact, the echo of Marvel's decision to get out of the "rails" (they did something similar with "Guardians of the Galaxy") and to hire Taika Waititi as the director of "Thor: Ragnarok" is yet to be felt in the comic universe as a domino effect - not only the production expectations, but also the actors' perceptions of how to analyze and approach their stories and characters, and I also believe that viewers will look at these movies as stereotyped ones - like Waititi, they just will not take anything seriously and will have fun, a lot of fun.
I am sure that the most important condition for the existence of "Thor: Ragnarok" in this form is precisely the approach of his director and the freedom that is given to him. I doubt it is important for someone to tell exactly which comic book is used and interpreted, how the characters have changed in comparison to the comic stories, and what cameo the legendary Stan Lee has in the movie - the audience is the most important thing. The director claims that the main inspiration for him was Thor's other "father" (except Lee) - the artist Jack Kirby, with his extraordinary visual style. Funny stylistic elements are selected from Walt Simonson's "Ragnarok" arch and Jason Aron's "Thor: God of Thunder", and in their intention to include something else - green and big, who can SMASH, decide to use a line from "Planet Hulk" with the planet Sakaar - the galactic garbage collector, recreated with an eclectic futuristic swing and ruled by the madman The Grandmaster(Jeff Goldblum).
The main action is swirling around the throne of Asgard. Thor returns home with the horns of the legendary demon Surtur and finds a frivolous stage re-creation of Loki's death, set in front of Odin and his courtiers. I pay attention to this scene mainly for two fun reasons - the scene includes Sam Neill and Matt Damon, and the unique Anthony Hopkins enjoys everything with his Loki-transformed-as-Odin attitude. In search of Odin, Thor walks into Dr. Strange's office, where the jokes are flat, but Benedict Cumberbatch and Tom Hiddleston appear in one shot. So far, serious and powerful actors who have built a reputation over the years with all kinds of roles, give it a good pleasure to rejoin the comic images. And it becomes even more fun - we get acquainted with Hela, Odin's first-born daughter, freed from exile after his death. The role is entrusted to Cate Blanchett herself, winner of around 148 awards from all over the world plus two Oscar-winning statuettes. She tells her how delighted she is that she even though she's old, she will be able to put on her latex suit and flutter like the Goddess of Death who had awaited for centuries to rule over Asgard and all known worlds. I trust her at every moment - with every step, with every gesture and glance, the Goddess comes alive through Blanchett and, with a visible delight, takes up territory from the plot. After clearing her way from the two princes, she finds a watchdog, looks at her father's treasury, and walks generally aimlessly in Asgard, while Heimdal helps refugees dissatisfied with her authority, in an ancient mountain fortress. Meanwhile, The Grandmaster sets up a decent gladiatoric battle between Thor and Hulk, and after exchanging jokes, including the Stone Revolutionary Corg, voiced by Waititi himself, the two "friends from work", along with the only surviving Valkyrie and Loki are getting out of the planet through a gigantic portal with the sound name "Devil's Anus" to deal with Hela.
You can guess how everything ends. Every attempt to summarize the movie leads to conclusions quite different from the feelings during the film. It is extremely refreshing to see actors who do not shine with special qualities (besides sculpted muscles) trying to get dignified in the joking tone of the film. It is also unique to watch good actors proudly wearing their multicolored cloaks and recreating beloved comic characters. No matter how stressful the first glance at the colorful official poster of the film, it turns out to be just that - a kaleidoscope of images and adventures.
What I find interesting about the storyline behind comics is that they follow the same trajetory as the story of Christ in the books written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. it is the classic Hollywood narrative of the hero on his journey. I remember when I was attending screenwriting classes who shocked I was to find out that screenwriters use a guideline called the'hero's joruney' if I am correct. There are basically 8 main steps that the hero has to go through that leaves the audience in awe of his journey. The one's that I can remember are
-The hero finds a group of companions along his journey.
-He encounters an obstacle that's practically impossible to overcome.
-The hero undergoes some kind of death (sometimes not physically)
-He undergoes a resurrection by gaining an elixir of some sort (sometimes not physically again)
I'm just fascinated by why we have not yet seen a comical version of the Bible since screenplays just about get their substance from the it..
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by Svetlio (dwarfche on steemit) from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, someguy123, neoxian, followbtcnews, and netuoso. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows. Please find us at the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
If you would like to delegate to the Minnow Support Project you can do so by clicking on the following links: 50SP, 100SP, 250SP, 500SP, 1000SP, 5000SP.
Be sure to leave at least 50SP undelegated on your account.