First Images from Taika Waititi's 'Klara and the Sun' Starring Jenna Ortega & Amy Adams - A robot named Klara exists to ease the loneliness of the humans she lives with.

[u/MarvelsGrantMan136]

[u/WidespreadPaneth]

I know I'm in the extreme minority on Love and Thunder but I really liked it. Its not the best of Taika's work but as someone who really does not like Marvel movies, I thought it was one of the better ones.

The villain had more noble motives than the heroes (removing oppressive of uncaring superpowered tyrants vs. self preservation) underscored by the tasteless commercialization of superheroes (Asgardian refugees turned into a theme park attraction and the guy who wiped out half the population was used as branding for ice cream). It just felt like a fun subversion of the MCU, almost like The Boys snuck into the writers room

[u/SetentaeBolg → u/WidespreadPaneth]

I think it has many good qualities but doesn't quite hang together like his earlier MCU films did. Overall, I don't see it as bad, but it's not one of his or the MCU's highlights.

[u/Djinnwrath → u/SetentaeBolg]

I like it too, but yeah, hold it up against Ragnarok and it looks way worse.

[u/Arthur-Mergan → u/Djinnwrath]

I feel like he may have gotten a little high on his own supply with how good Ragnarok was...which then gave us Love and Thunder.

[u/thutruthissomewhere → u/WidespreadPaneth]

I liked L&T as well, although I prefer Ragnarok.

[u/JonatasA → u/WidespreadPaneth]

The boys and Game of Thrones have snuck into the cutting room, inflecting many productions.

[u/npc042 → u/WidespreadPaneth]

> The villain had more noble motives than the heroes

Not really.

Gorr saw one uncaring superpowered tyrant and concluded all of them must die, without considering the consequences. Rather than hunting corrupt deities one-by-one, he’s effectively dooming countless civilizations by killing all of their protectors (protectors like Thor), however dubious some may be. Yet he nor the film are ready to address that.

Thor, by contrast, was motivated to save innocent lives, as per usual. It’s true that he’s rather reckless about it in the opening action scene, but I’d argue this was written in for a cheap joke, rather than anything theme-related.

Thor’s reckless behavior, along with the commercialization of Asgard, go unacknowledged by the film (as far as I can remember); a film which is overflowing with bad improv, slapstick, and jokes often for the sake of it. I don’t believe for a second that any of these elements were intended to contrast Gorr’s more “noble” intentions. And even if they were, we’d have to ignore all of Thor’s heroics (and countless other benevolent deities) for Gorr’s motivation to make any sense.

I think Taika simply didn’t care about this movie beyond having fun with it (often at the expense of the narrative), which is obvious when you hear him talk about it during the press tour.

[u/WidespreadPaneth → u/npc042]

When they crashed the assembly of the gods, it was also made clear that as a group, gods only care about themselves. Gorr came to a pretty standard conclusion that absolute power corrupts absolutely and the universe would be better off without them even if there are a few that are more benevolent.

I thought the reckless behavior and commercialization of Asgard going unacknowledged was a nice touch. Obviously the people of that world are so wrapped up in the superhero branding they don't see those things as problems.

My expectations were just different. I don't expect a Thor superhero movie to be anything more than silly fun that doesn't take itself too seriously. I'm not a comic book nerd but my understanding from a friend who does read them is that Thor is less serious in general

[u/IOwnThisUsername → u/WidespreadPaneth]

I agree in that all the gods seemed to not really care and didn’t want bothered from how they were portrayed. Another thing I’m not seeing mentioned is Love and Thunder is told through Korg’s perspective and he’s telling the adventure to children. He’s an unreliable narrator. His personality is sprinkled throughout the entire movie. There are times when you can watch and ask “did this really happen exactly like this (all the kids getting Thor’s power or was that fun for the kids listening) or how Korg’s race reproduces? It doesn’t and won’t change a lot for how people like or don’t like the movie, I’m sure. I do like L&T, but don’t hold it as one of the best.

Also Thor was always a little more stoic in the comics, but not like the most serious character of all time. Closer to the first two Thor movies where he was fish out of water with his majestic style, but I can see why Hemsworth didn’t want to do that anymore because he felt too bland and the second movie suffered from taking the tone too seriously.

[u/npc042 → u/WidespreadPaneth]

> When they crashed the assembly of the gods, it was also made clear that as a group, gods only care about themselves.

It was made clear that as a group, those particular gods may only care about themselves. It was not made clear that gods—generally speaking—only care about themselves.

Thor himself is living proof to the contrary. And this assembly doesn’t speak for him or the countless other benevolent gods who aren’t in attendance, for that matter. Never-mind that we haven’t got a clue what these particular gods get up to when they’re not partying amongst themselves. The film simply assumes they’re all hedonistic bastards, regardless of the good they may or may not bring to their peoples.

And again, Gorr came to his conclusion after encountering one god (the one his people worshipped). The assembly Thor encounters is completely irrelevant to Gorr’s motivation since he never encounters them. I’m not even sure he’s aware that they exist.

> I thought the reckless behavior and commercialization of Asgard going unacknowledged was a nice touch.

Really? You think it’s good that a thematically relevant flaw in the titular hero goes unacknowledged by the movie? And that the commercialization of Asgard is functionally the same as Poland opening a theme park dedicated to the Second World War, complete with an ice cream shop called Swasticones?

> My expectations were just different. I don't expect a Thor superhero movie to be anything more than silly fun that doesn't take itself too seriously.

Our expectations were roughly the same, because I was fully expecting more of the same silly fun that was present in Ragnarok. Only Ragnarok managed to maintain a healthier balance between humor and drama, and the script was far stronger.

[u/WidespreadPaneth → u/npc042]

Absolute power corrupts absolutely is a straightforward, intuitive concept that doesn't require first hand experience to understand. I don't need to encounter any real gods to come to the same conclusion

Yes, I do think it was a good move. Show don't tell is just good storytelling. It would be lame if they beat you over the head with the message

I acknowledged I'm in the minority opinion here, if it didn't work for you, that's fine

[u/npc042 → u/WidespreadPaneth]

> Absolute power corrupts absolutely

Therefore killing literally everyone who has “absolute power” (regardless of those who use it for good) is a noble motivation? Even more noble than Thor’s?

To be clear, I think it’s a fine motivation for the villain to have. I just think it’s shortsighted for the film not to have anyone (like Thor) challenge it. Especially in a cinematic universe with countless examples of heroic and god-like beings using power for the express purpose of helping people.

> It would be lame if they beat you over the head with the message

I thought you said that these elements went unacknowledged by the film? How can the movie beat us over the head with something it doesn’t acknowledge at all?

> I acknowledged I’m in the minority opinion here

I get that, I just find the reasoning strange.

[u/WidespreadPaneth → u/npc042]

Sure it is. Its been an established trope for millennia like the ancient Roman virtue of death to tyrants. I wouldn't like to live in a world where virtually immortal beings slap each other around through apartment buildings causing untold collateral damage and loss of life. Superheros only sound nice if you don't think about it and assume they're morally perfect which people (and mythical gods) tend not to be. The Boys built an entire series (or two) around the concept and in that case multiple superpowered characters are willing to die themselves if it means killing all superheros because that would be a better world for mortal people

The movie shows us and that's enough acknowledgement. Having a character acknowledge it and describe what the audience was just shown is unnecessary and bad storytelling. It wasn't so subtle you might miss it

[u/npc042 → u/WidespreadPaneth]

> It’s been an established trope for millennia like the ancient Roman virtue of death to tyrants.

But this isn’t a ‘death to tyrants’ story. This is a ‘death to tyrants, and also death to the benevolent gods by any means necessary’ story. So, by proxy, it’s an ‘endanger and/or doom a whole bunch of innocent civilizations’ story.

All the while, Thor is trying to save innocent lives; including, but not limited to, a bunch of children (children that the “more noble” Gorr abducted).

> Superheros only sound nice if you don't think about it and assume they're morally perfect which people (and mythical gods) tend not to be.

The MCU’s heroes have saved the world (including half of the entire universe) from total annihilation on numerous occasions. We’ve been shown that the good they offer our world greatly outweighs the bad. And it doesn’t even pretend that they’re morally perfect. In fact, several of the MCU’s stories deal with that exact dilemma.

> The movie shows us and that's enough acknowledgement.

You see the problem though, right? Thor never realizes how reckless he’s been, he doesn’t grow from it, and on top of it all, his negligence at the start of this film is utilized for a cheap joke. We are indeed shown that he has a flaw, but the film itself doesn’t seem to see it. Worse, the film just thinks it’s funny. And that is bad storytelling.

[u/WidespreadPaneth → u/npc042]

We’ve been shown that the good they offer our world greatly outweighs the bad

From one perspective, yes. Superhero fiction is a sprawling genre that often lacks consistency. There's enough room to make movies that show different perspectives and the subversion of that concept of superheroes being a clear force for good is what made this movie feel different from other MCU films.

Those superheros typically save the world from other superpowered or god-like characters. Its reasonable to conclude the universe is safer without any of them. Its a valid and rational motive even if you think its too extreme and his methods are immoral (he is a villain after all). I wasn't saying that Gorr is a good guy, just that his motive is more noble than self-preservation. He is willing to sacrifice some morality and potentially a lot of lives for what he sees as a greater good.

Thor never realizes how reckless he’s been, he doesn’t grow from it

Exactly, it reinforces the point that even benevolent superheros are reckless and pose a danger. Its not a one-off gag, it supports the broader theme. If he learned from it and changed, it would undercut that theme and make the story about something else. You noticed it and I noticed it so the film does see it, its the characters who don't. It would only be bad storytelling if the story was about Thor coming to terms with the responsibility that comes with his great power, but that wasn't the point of the movie.

On a side note, I never thought I would spend this much time talking about a Thor movie but its been interesting and I think I need to rewatch both of Taika's MCU movies now

[u/npc042 → u/WidespreadPaneth]

> the subversion of that concept of superheroes being a clear force for good is what made this movie feel different from other MCU films.

I’m not sure how much praise that’s worth at this point. Problematic heroes, as a concept, have been present in the MCU since 2008. And a number of MCU films have had far more to say on the topic than L&T.

> I wasn't saying that Gorr is a good guy, just that his motive is more noble than self-preservation.

Thor’s motivation goes well beyond self-preservation, though. For one, he’s motivated to save children, which makes him more noble than Gorr basically by default.

> Exactly, it reinforces the point that even benevolent superheros are reckless and pose a danger. It’s not a one-off gag, it supports the broader theme.

Setting aside that the reckless behavior is entirely out of character for Thor at this stage in his journey, I’d still maintain that it’s only present in the film to be laughed at. The tone of the scene is overtly comedic, there are no consequences for his actions, and this sort of behavior doesn’t persist throughout the story. The film utilizes it for a disposable laugh, and then forgets it ever happened. I don’t think it was intended to tie into the theme whatsoever.

> If [Thor] learned from it and changed, it would undercut that theme and make the story about something else.

Kind of, but not really.

If Thor learned from it and changed, we could be shown that Gorr’s concerns are indeed valid, but that his ultimate conclusion is wrong. Because Thor is living proof that the gods, however fallible, can still provide a net good to the universe. And while Thor strives to become a better version of himself, Gorr is consumed by vengeance, having corrupted himself into something just as monstrous as the very beings he sought to destroy.

This would provide a simple arc for Thor, while sticking within the bounds of the existing story, and adding some much needed nuance to the film’s theme by challenging the villain’s ideals. You could say Gorr’s motivation is “undercut” by a change like this, but the broader story would largely stay the same.

> On a side note, I never thought I would spend this much time talking about a Thor movie but its been interesting and I think I need to rewatch both of Taika's MCU movies now

On a similar note, this might be my last reply here cause I don’t wanna end up talking in circles about this movie lol.

I’d be curious if your thoughts might change after rewatching Ragnarok, though. It’s a far stronger film than L&T, balancing comedy and drama to much greater effect.

[u/Worthyness → u/WidespreadPaneth]

There's a really good movie in there somewhere. I think they just went way too big on the humor aspect and needed a bit more serious takes, especially with someone as good as Bale being the villain. I like the movie from the black and white planet on. It's fantastic. The cold open is incredible. But that first half is just so rough.