Thor: Ragnarok

Dir: Taika Waititi

2017

*****

Thor has been regarded by many as The Avenger’s weakest element. I disagree. I know many didn’t like Thor: The Dark World but I thought it was pretty good but it was certainly time for a change of direction. While the Marvel films have taken on a slightly lighter tone in Phase III of the MCU, Thor has always been quite serious. You can just about get away with anything in comics and as a child I never questioned why a God would be fighting alongside a giant green man and man in a robotic suit, it was what it was and what it was was cool. However, when making a more serious live action adaption that has to be unique as well as adhering to a bigger thread of continuity, it’s hard to work out where to place such a character such as Thor. I’m not convinced Marvel have ever actually 100% succeeded with this, at least not until now. The announcement that Taika Waititi was going to be the director of Thor’s third outing was met with excitement and confusion. What was Marvel thinking? I remember being shocked when I learned that Kenneth Branagh was going to direct the original Thor in 2011 but it sort of made sense due to his experience with epics and costume period pieces. It was less surprising when Alan Taylor directed the second film, not because of his film credits but because of his rich experience working in TV. Waititi has made a few of my favourite films of all time (What We Do in the Shadows, Eagle vs. Shark, Hunt for the Wilderpeople) but they were very low budget comedies. I was terrified when it was announced that Peyton Reed was announced as the Ant-Man director and that turned out brilliantly but Waititi seemed like a fantasy director. I’ve had serious conversations with other comic/film nerds about who our fantasy Avengers directors would be and I always say Lars von Trier – Captain America, Werner Herzog – Hulk, Alejandro Jodorowsky – Avengers, Andrei Tarkovsky – Guardians of the Galaxy, Takeshi Tikano – Iron Man and Stanley Kubrick – Thor. I guess I’m something of an anarchist, the MCU would go down in flames if I were in charge but Waititi directing Thor, could that really work? It turns out it was a genius idea. While Waititi didn’t write the story of Thor: Ragnarok he developed the tone and the style and the overall direction the characters should go. When you think about it, it makes perfect sense. While Thor: Ragnarok has a totally different tone to Captain America: Civil War, it does bring the colourful and otherworldly playfulness of Guardians of the Galaxy closer to the fold. It’s nice to get away from Earth too, like the comics do quite often. The film incorporates classic stories from across various different threads. It follows elements from Ragnarok – which was part of the Civil War story; the Surtur saga – which is classic golden age stuff from Stan Lee and Jack Kirby from the 60s; the Contest of Champions story – a favourite of mine from the 80s; and Planet Hulk – one of the greatest ‘What if’ scenarios Marvel have ever produced. It is the perfect amalgamation of Thor/Marvel through the ages and something the hard-core fans of the comics have always wanted. Ragnarok featured a clone of Thor, Contest of Champions saw Captain America, Talisman, Darkstar, Captain Britain, Wolverine, Defensor, Sasquatch, Daredevil, Peregrine, She-Hulk, The Thing and Blitzkrieg fight in a tournament against Iron Man, Vanguard, Iron Fist, Shamrock, Storm, Arabian Knight, Sabra, Invisible Girl, Angel, Black Panther, Sunfire and the Collective Man in a sort of pre-civil war story that was a bit like Planet Hulk’s Gladiatorial story but featuring the Elders of the Universe. While it is not quite the same as those comics, it certainly retains much of what made them exciting. You certainly don’t have to be a Marvel expert to enjoy the merge of ideas but it is lots of fun for those that are. As much as fans would want to see a pure adaption of Planet Hulk and World War Hulk, it wouldn’t fit into the bigger story and Marvel clearly know what they are doing. I never thought characters like The Grandmaster, The Collector, Surtur or Korg would have a place in the MCU, and I’m fine with the exclusion of characters like Beta Ray Bill for instance – it really could be far more confusing than it is. What Marvel has done is encourage a bunch of talented writer/directors from a cross section of genre and styles, to use their back catalogue as well as develop their own ideas. Apparently Ruben Fleischer, Rob Letterman and Rawson Marshall Thurber were in the running alongside Waititi for creative director. I’m not sure what they saw in either We’re the Millers, Goosebumps or Zombieland that made them think they’d be perfect for Thor but supposedly Waititi created a sizzle reel that won them over, even though sizzle reels are something that Marvel strongly discourage. He kind of broke all the rules from then on. Thor: Ragnarok is technically a comedy. Waititi keeps it authentic, adapts elements from the Golden age of Marvel, as well as the cool stuff they did in the 80s and the more modern works that brought fresh new ideas to the characters, and also tells it like it is. That is, he, the writers and Marvel finally admit that much of Marvel’s history/stories/characters are absurd. Thor is a ridiculous character who meets other ridiculous characters in ridiculous places in ridiculous scenarios. Waititi’s film embraces the nonsense and the nostalgia and makes a fun film out of it. It fits perfectly in the MCU, right in-between Guardians of the Galaxy and Infinity War, while balancing the tone of Guardians and Civil War. Thor and Hulk took a backseat during Civil War, it is only right we be told why they were absent and what they were doing and Ragnarok is a pretty good excuse as excuses go. Thor’s character had become stale and a little one dimensional, it makes sense that he develop and it makes sense that he lightens up following his time on Earth with the other Avengers. Loki has also had time to mature and reflect and finally we have a significant development of The Hulk – rather than Bruce Banner. Waititi’s tone is a mix of neon sci-fi and soft-focus fantasy and it works perfectly. The humour and banter between characters works surprisingly well, which won’t win everyone over but is something that the franchise needed in my opinion. He’s brought a lot of his own style to the mix but the classic comics are there as well as other sci-fi influences, the work of Harry Harrison immediately springing to mind. Thor is a bit like Jack Burton from Big Trouble in Little China, as Waititi puts it "What's the version of Thor just wanting to get his truck back? He's the one looking at the world and bringing a certain sarcasm and irony to this cosmic landscape." It totally works for me. This is about as authentic as the space/fantasy side of the classic comics gets. They have achieved everything I never thought they could all in one film. I thought the idea of Guardians of the Galaxy was unfilmable but that is nothing compared to what they do with Thor. The best part of The Avengers was when Hulk threw Loki around Stark Towers and that is what Waititi and co have given us more of. Korg is one of the dullest, most boring characters ever created by Marvel but he is now one of my favourite characters in the MCU and I can’t wait to see more of him in Infinity Wars. Cate Blanchett’s Hela is easily one of the most interesting villains the MUC has had so far, her character built from the brilliant Jason Aaron’s Hela and Gor from Thor: God of Thunder. She looks as she did in Aaron’s comic but Blanchett gives her her personality. Likewise, Tessa Thompson’s Valkyrie almost steals the show – which is really saying something given the strong competition. I’ve never thought of Valkyrie with much regard, there are so many different versions of her, none of which have ever really stood out, but Thompson’s take on the character is brilliant and I can see her being a key player in the new Avengers. Much has been said of the absence of Natalie Portman’s Jane Foster but in my opinion the franchise is better off without her. She didn’t bring anything to the Thor films, the romance between her and Thor stunted the stories and she clearly had no love for the part anyway. He’s a much more interesting character without her and other characters can now develop. I’m not sure the MCU ever needed Kat Dennings in the first place and Stellan Skarsgard will return I’m sure, it just didn’t make sense to involve his character here. My biggest gripe, and it is quite big, is that my favourite Lady Sif is missing. Not a bad thing as it turns out regarding the story but only if she returns to the franchise in the near future – if she doesn’t I’m out. Thor and Hulk – the two Avengers no one ever knows what to with – make a great double act and raise a surprising amount of laughs. Certain scenes had the entire cinema I was sitting in roar with laughter, something I would never had expected but loved when it happened. None of the humour is forced either, it’s all very natural and remarkably casual. Waititi has said that around 80% of the script was improvised and with a director like him such an idea actually works for the best. It’s a sci-fi, fantasy, super-hero, action romp with all the entertainment you could hope from such a film. The sets are either retro-pop – the kind you’d find in any Jack Kirby classic, and utterly gorgeous fantasy landscapes that reminded me of Simon Bisley’s Slaine comics from the 90s mixed with the Sistine Chapel. The film is full of brilliant electro-synth riffs and opens and closes with Led Zeppelin’s amazing Immigrant Song which I dare say will now be known as Thor’s theme tune. I saw so much of what I love about comics in it, I saw a big franchise taking a risk and I saw cinema changing the formula for a change. This is evolution. I don’t think I suffer superhero movie fatigue as much as most people because I watch heaps of other films from various different genres and so far Marvel haven’t made a bad film. I think lessons were learned from Iron Man 2 and since then it’s just got better and better. I’m sick of trailers giving away too much, I’m sick of little independents getting overlooked and I’m sick of other franchises (DC, Star Wars) copying Marvel but I’m certainly not sick of the MCU, with each of their films outdoing the last, always moving onwards and upwards and evolving. I would argue that instead of taking over, Marvel is paving the way for new ideas and aren’t just an inspiration for superhero/comic adaptations but cinema as a whole. At least film makers are now actually reading the comics they are turning into films, which they certainly weren’t doing in the 80s and 90s.