Thor: The Dark World

User Score
7.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1060 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Nov 9, 2013
    4
    i guess this movie being bad or good completely depends on the person's opinion on the matter because it looks like everyone seemed to enjoy this movie; i for one disliked it; why you ask? because this movie failed to excite me or keep me on the edge of my seat; thor tries so hard to be intense, epic, and funny and the same time! what thor fails to realize though is that if you try to bei guess this movie being bad or good completely depends on the person's opinion on the matter because it looks like everyone seemed to enjoy this movie; i for one disliked it; why you ask? because this movie failed to excite me or keep me on the edge of my seat; thor tries so hard to be intense, epic, and funny and the same time! what thor fails to realize though is that if you try to be funny then you ruin the intensity of the action youre trying to aim for; the epicness was cobbled down by all these comedic one liners the cast shouts out every 5 minutes; thats fine and all if youre trying to be a funny movie; but this movie is trying to get you worried about villians trying to take over the galaxy but when youre laughing the whole time, the worryment tends to fade away; case in point, this movie didnt know what it was trying to be; the movie spouts off in all sorts of different directions and fails to establish itself strongly in a style

    case in point, this movie failed to excite me, the villains were forgettable, the plot was uninteresting due to lack of explanation of whats going on; lack of character developement, lack of acting and attachment to the characters,this movie has so much going wrong with it

    the only thing keeping me from giving this movie a 0 was the CG effects and thor's brother; thor's brother was like the only character that stood out from the rest; he carried a persona and executed it well through his style
    Expand
  2. Aug 14, 2015
    5
    Just like its boring predecessor, "Thor: The Dark World" is filled with heavy-handed sub-par action, dialogue, and performances. Probably the weakest series in the Marvel universe by far.
  3. Nov 27, 2013
    5
    For me, the first movie was more enjoyable. The Dark World has potentials but failed to deliver a convincing act and dialogue. The jokes are often on-point, but some are too much. The production is also a little bit all over the place and I can't really enjoy the one and a half hour spent seeing the whole movie. It did entertain me, but not to the point where I'd happily give out at leastFor me, the first movie was more enjoyable. The Dark World has potentials but failed to deliver a convincing act and dialogue. The jokes are often on-point, but some are too much. The production is also a little bit all over the place and I can't really enjoy the one and a half hour spent seeing the whole movie. It did entertain me, but not to the point where I'd happily give out at least a 7 or an 8. Expand
  4. Dec 2, 2013
    6
    Seen it yesterday very poor movie ,plot and very poor actor I sometimes enjoyed some scenes especially the big battles and thor sequences but that's it you will forget this movie very soon
  5. Feb 15, 2014
    6
    I begin by saying in a simple line, this sequel was just okay for me. I did not find any awesomeness in it or any mind blowing scenes. The first movie was quite interested me because of a new actor, new superhero character and the birth of the new franchise from Marvel studio. All together with a mythical Greek character in a modern world, it was something that hit me. Just a few monthsI begin by saying in a simple line, this sequel was just okay for me. I did not find any awesomeness in it or any mind blowing scenes. The first movie was quite interested me because of a new actor, new superhero character and the birth of the new franchise from Marvel studio. All together with a mythical Greek character in a modern world, it was something that hit me. Just a few months back, I praised Hemsworth for his best ever performance in the biographical picture 'Rush'. Here he has fallen back to okay kinda performance. The movie was nothing special, but a decent entertainment. Technically, it was rich in visuals with good graphics, no one must dare to doubt it. My problem was the story which followed the usual fantasy movie protocol. One of the disappointment from 2013, completely a commercial purpose behind its creation and production. Yeah, all the movie are but this one is very much visible. So in my opinion, it is one time watch movie.

    6.5/10
    Expand
  6. Nov 26, 2013
    5
    Thor 2 as second as Second hand. I hope this year is not over I will see probably action movie with an idea or sense! They have shooting a movie which are soulless.
    begging your pardon, but I suggest not to see this movie unless you want waist your time.
    You will see nothing original.
  7. Dec 2, 2013
    4
    the jokes in it are not funny. The movie starts to get boring from the beginning. I heard the last few scenes are saved by the director of The Avengers, which are the only interesting parts in this movie.
  8. Jan 17, 2015
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The first half of the film was very boring and did NOTHING to engage the audience. The film only really picked up just before Loki was broken out of his cell by Thor. Characters (apart from Loki) were bland and extremely boring, Malekith was terrible, the Aether just seemed like another Tesseract, his army were a little too similar to the Chitari for my liking and may as well have just been Storm Troopers and the whole "turning the entire universe into darkness" plot line seemed too cliché.

    Special effects were special. What was with the weird colour scheme used and the blurry backgrounds? It looked like something out of 300. Asgard still looked nice.

    I enjoyed seeing Loki and Thor team-up but Thor's action sequences on his own weren't that good. The final battle was a little too reminiscent of the IM3 final battle for my liking; Thor jumping into different worlds/Tony jumping into different Iron Man suits.

    So, this film is only really good enough because of Loki. If it wasn't for the character and his excellent portrayal by Tom Hiddleston, this film would most likely get a 3/10. If you want to know what happens in the film because you want to catch up with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, just read the plot online and maybe watch a montage of the best Loki moments in the film.
    Expand
  9. Nov 25, 2015
    6
    Okay, so I enjoyed the first Thor film. I thought the way they executed Thor's fish-out-of-water story was very well done, and Tom Hiddleston's Loki was excellent as a villain. but this forced sequel had some enjoyable moments (mainly from Loki, again), but also a slightly underdeveloped villain and a strange, confusing premise.
  10. Feb 11, 2016
    4
    Thor: the dark world is the sequel to Thor, and the first Mcu sequel to a character other than iron man. Firstly the action is pretty amazing, as well as the fight scenes. The acting and cast are good, and the comedy was right on point. As well, the character development between Thor and Loki was the highlight of the film. However, this movie has many problems. Firstly the character fromThor: the dark world is the sequel to Thor, and the first Mcu sequel to a character other than iron man. Firstly the action is pretty amazing, as well as the fight scenes. The acting and cast are good, and the comedy was right on point. As well, the character development between Thor and Loki was the highlight of the film. However, this movie has many problems. Firstly the character from the first movie that was annoying, became twice as annoying. Not only that but the over-complicated plot line is very hard to follow and by the end you don't really know what was going on. The villain is yet again boring and underdeveloped and many of the scenes in the film make no sense. Altogether Thor: the dark world is the weakest of the Mcu films and possibly the least important. Expand
  11. Nov 8, 2013
    5
    It seem the movie is carried by gags and silly jokes. The final battle is literally mixed in with numerous gags. If that's your thing, then you will surely enjoy it. But I wonder what this movie would've been like if the plot and villain were to fleshed out better, with better motivation, and dramatic moments were left comedy free. Oh well.
  12. Nov 17, 2013
    6
    Thor 2 is easy to forget, with a predictable story and character not so charismatic. Sometimes can be a little bit boring, but have some good action scenes.
  13. Dec 12, 2013
    6
    This movie was an improvement from the last Thor movie but not by much. Several hours after I saw it I didn't think about it. A good movie stays with you days after you see it if it's real good, not this one. I saw Oblivion with Tom Cruise the following day on Blue Ray and thought about it for days after. It's definitely not as good as the first 2 Iron Man movies and is not one of Marvel'sThis movie was an improvement from the last Thor movie but not by much. Several hours after I saw it I didn't think about it. A good movie stays with you days after you see it if it's real good, not this one. I saw Oblivion with Tom Cruise the following day on Blue Ray and thought about it for days after. It's definitely not as good as the first 2 Iron Man movies and is not one of Marvel's better franchises. It's a rental at best. Expand
  14. Jan 6, 2014
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This film fits into the MCU very nicely. If you weren't a fan of the Avengers collective already then this probably isn't the film that's going to win you over but if like me you're already well invested in the series then Thor 2 is a nice addition. It progresses Thor's story pretty well, raises some questions about the next Avengers film, the characters are well developed and the action sequences are awesome to watch.
    Some of the dialogue can be a bit cheesey at times but you kind of have to forgive a bit of cheesiness in a film about a comic book hero based on norse mythology. Also Malekith isn't the most impressive villain. *spoilers start here* There isn't a great deal of personality or motivation in his character, pretty much the only background we for him is "da bad guy gon' do bad tings." He has two fight sequences in the whole film. The first one he gets his arse handed to him by Thor's mammy and the second one is his final fight with Thor himself which he inevitably loses. Against the previous bad guy, Loki (who's character development and eventual fate are extremely intriguing in this film), he doesn't really measure up.
    Overall this film is worth seeing and certainly enjoyable if you are a fan of the Avengers films. But if not then it's not going do much for you.
    Expand
  15. Nov 15, 2013
    6
    It's clear by the high scores that a lot of folks wanted a Thor movie high on action and special effects and sweeping vistas and low on calories. I have seen "Better than the first movie" a lot but I can tell you this movie lost me pretty much from the opening prologue about "Dark Elves" that have laser guns and spaceships and hate light and think the universe belongs to them becauseIt's clear by the high scores that a lot of folks wanted a Thor movie high on action and special effects and sweeping vistas and low on calories. I have seen "Better than the first movie" a lot but I can tell you this movie lost me pretty much from the opening prologue about "Dark Elves" that have laser guns and spaceships and hate light and think the universe belongs to them because apparently they were their first. Before the beginning there wasn't light. Yeah, got it, but the premise doesn't satisfy the viewer as to what the "Dark Elves" are and why they're flying in spacecraft that seem like rejected designs from a new Star Trek movie. Did you understand it, or how they derived their technology or why the gas that dentists used to give before they operated is somehow the most dangerous thing in the universe? Besides the Tesseract (or the Infinity Gauntlet, or the next thing that is the most dangerous thing) ?

    No, I didn't like Thor 2 as much as the original because the original had some calories and had some restraint...and a real story and a point. It was a well crafted story, directed by someone who understands stories...and basically Thor's story is right from King Lear where Gloster (Odin) banishes the good son Edgar (Thor) because he was deceived by the bad son Edmund (Loki). Later, when Loki is found to be the villain Thor returns home to set things right best he can and Loki's bid to be king is foiled. Yes, Thor is a fairly pedestrian THOR story, with little action, but with good acting, drama and a logic to what is going on. We have pathos and we have an Odin we can believe in. Running through the thread of Thor is that Odin rescues Loki from death, all the time knowing that Thor will be king but also raising him as his son, knowing it is doomed and that Loki will find his real heritage and betray him and Thor...and that this challenge will mold Thor into being the leader of Asgard that Odin wants him to be. Odin is in control of the situation and see the story play out.

    The original Thor movie was weighted by the need to set up the character and his universe to join in with the rest of the Marvels to lead to the pay-off in Avengers. So it tip-toes its way to being a Thor movie that yes, can be a real yawner at times.

    And so Thor 2 shows no restraint when it comes to logic, characterization, the laws of physics or basically getting around to splaining itself. So yeah, the Dark Elves (Borgs?) seek to destroy the universe because they need SPF 1000 to survive or something. They were there first, in the dark, then light and life and warmth appeared and they fought to get it back and created a mega-weapon but were defeated because the Asgardians have the Rainbow Bridge (teleporters). So Malekith (Sauron) goes into hibernation until Jane Foster (Bilbo) finds the Laughing Gas which wakes him up and Jane is the carrier of the Ether (the One Ring) who must first be helped in Asgard (Rivendell) and then the answer to stopping Malekith (Sauron's) armies is to take the Ether to the very place it shouldn't go, in a bid to destroy it.

    Now where this all falls apart is...a somewhat accurate portrayal of Odin from the comics (or anywhere else), but a fantastic departure from characterization, simply to create set pieces for an actioner. The relationship between Thor and Jane Foster is not one that Odin has approved of and, while his heart may be in the right place, his actions regarding Jane, the Ether, how to deal with Malekith, his behavior after Frigga is killed (which is pointless since razing Asgard would be reason for vengeance enow) creates...hmm...all you folks who hated Thor...look what you've got now:

    Odin forbids Thor to do something.
    Thor and his friends (and Loki) do the very thing they're not supposed to.
    Betraying the orders of Odin results in solving the problem.
    Loki seeks the throne by betrayal, only this time he wins, apparently.

    Sound familiar? Yeah, no real story that we haven't seen before...except this time, Thor and his friends are absolutely right in betraying Odin's commands because clearly Odin sees only a red mist after Frigga's death and no longer has a reason for what he does. Odin could have clearly done the opposite and set Thor and Co on the same mission, but it wouldn't create enough tension, that this film clearly needed.

    Because...if Odin simply tells Thor and Co to go to the Dark World, then...yes folks, Loki stays in his Friggin cell and the movie is completely diff. And it's contrived because of Odin's sudden lack of wisdom and self-control. He's simply an angry god making poor judgments, to merely serve a shoe-horned story whose aim is to blown stuff up reel good.

    Thud. Yeah. So yes...it's a good action film if you don't care for story/plot/characterization or an original tale. It, like Iron Man III, dispenses with storytelling to get to the action.

    Selah
    Expand
  16. Dec 16, 2013
    5
    When I sat back watching this movie I was surprised how quickly the time passed. This movie was entertaining from start to finish. Asgard looks amazing. Many millions of dollars have been spent CGI'ing this film up the wazoo. And the fight scenes are pretty epic. But the whole time I watched this film something about it was bugging me. And it was this. Natalie Portman, who can be anWhen I sat back watching this movie I was surprised how quickly the time passed. This movie was entertaining from start to finish. Asgard looks amazing. Many millions of dollars have been spent CGI'ing this film up the wazoo. And the fight scenes are pretty epic. But the whole time I watched this film something about it was bugging me. And it was this. Natalie Portman, who can be an amazing actor when she isn't phoning it in, could be replaced with a cardboard cutout for 90% of this film and the movie would run through exactly the same. I am unfamiliar with the comic book upon which the movie is based but I highly doubt the female protagonist is supposed to be so one dimensional. Heck her sidekick Kat Dennings had a more interesting and dynamic story arc with the intern. Natalie Portman meantime looks pretty and gets rescued, until the last minute when she springs into action using tools her co-workers figured out and built without her input, to science/magic somehow help Thor in the big boss battle at the end. And even there her help is rivaled by her co-workers. Not exactly lead protagonist material. Expand
  17. Jan 4, 2014
    5
    Esperava mais de Thor. O filme tem ótimos efeitos visuais e tralha voando para todo lado porém uma experiência de aspecto cansativo a única coisa que salva o filme a cena final.
  18. Nov 24, 2013
    6
    While better than the first, the sequel provides much more danger, darkness, and an adventurous story that fans are sure to love, but the film still follows the much overdone formula of every other Marvel movie (or superhero movie for that matter).
  19. Dec 10, 2013
    6
    Yes Thor 2 was entertaining. Was it anything great? Really? No. Just the same movie as the first one again. Was I expecting anymore from this movie? No. So was I surprised? Of course not. Would I recommend this movie to friends? If they want to see top of the line special effects and typical hollywood action? Yes. I give it extra points for Natalie Portmans sake. TypicalYes Thor 2 was entertaining. Was it anything great? Really? No. Just the same movie as the first one again. Was I expecting anymore from this movie? No. So was I surprised? Of course not. Would I recommend this movie to friends? If they want to see top of the line special effects and typical hollywood action? Yes. I give it extra points for Natalie Portmans sake. Typical popcorn munching fare. Expand
  20. Dec 28, 2013
    6
    Thor: The Dark World is a touch better than the first installment, but simply doesn't focus enough on what I believe are the two film's greatest strengths (Tom Hiddleston's Loki and the fish out of water humor).
  21. Jan 2, 2014
    6
    Loki stole the show. Tom Hiddleston really knows how to make his fandom proud and how to attract viewers to watch this sequel over and over again. However, like most movies, the first movie has a better storyline and is more exciting to watch. Compared to other superhero movie sequels, this movie is not too shabby.
  22. Jan 25, 2014
    5
    The plot is tied after the events of the Avengers , the protagonist Thor returns along with Loki to his father Odin ( Anthony Hopkins ) in Asgard.Odin Loki sent to prison.

    After that, Thor returns to Earth to his love Jane Foster . But their relationship does not represent dilemma . Soon Jane stumbles upon Ether which need dark elves led the Accursed ( Thor Loki releases to deal with
    The plot is tied after the events of the Avengers , the protagonist Thor returns along with Loki to his father Odin ( Anthony Hopkins ) in Asgard.Odin Loki sent to prison.

    After that, Thor returns to Earth to his love Jane Foster . But their relationship does not represent dilemma . Soon Jane stumbles upon Ether which need dark elves led the Accursed (
    Thor Loki releases to deal with the dark elves . Despite the excellent special effects sometimes funny jokes in the film are constantly trying to make a joke . For example the scene is tense and a minute later another joke . Nature of the characters spelled bad. Loki is the best and the expected character . Christopher good actor , but he came out of the villain quite weak.
    Expand
  23. Jan 5, 2016
    5
    WHAT I LIKED: A fairly formulaic venture by marvel - by far the highlight of this film is the developing relationship between Thor and Loki; 'Thor: The Dark World' feels on a larger scale which improves over the first Thor in that regard, plus there are the occasional emotional turns which add a little depth. Worth noting also are the special effects and world building from Game ofWHAT I LIKED: A fairly formulaic venture by marvel - by far the highlight of this film is the developing relationship between Thor and Loki; 'Thor: The Dark World' feels on a larger scale which improves over the first Thor in that regard, plus there are the occasional emotional turns which add a little depth. Worth noting also are the special effects and world building from Game of throne's Alan Taylor...
    WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE: It's just pretty dull - not only in a a visual sense (the dark visuals get very tiring on the eye), but the samey action scenes were in over-abundance here. Also, the bizzare plot is pretty boring yet it gets rather confusing with all the Asgardian terms. Oh, and Natalie Portman? Not her finest hours...
    VERDICT: This film brings Thor and his friends onto a whole new level of battle and war, but somehow dissapoints over the first film thanks to a fairly bland plot and a whole bunch of meaningless action. It's not terrible, but by no means Marvel's best
    Expand
  24. Mar 20, 2016
    6
    Thor: The Dark World offers the kind of straightforward action/adventure yarn that adherents of the genre will appreciate. It's an example of superhero filmmaking 101 at work with high octane fights and special effects-fueled eye candy trumping narrative. The movie is pretty to look at in a Transformers sort of way and moves briskly enough that it never threatens to bore, but it's hard toThor: The Dark World offers the kind of straightforward action/adventure yarn that adherents of the genre will appreciate. It's an example of superhero filmmaking 101 at work with high octane fights and special effects-fueled eye candy trumping narrative. The movie is pretty to look at in a Transformers sort of way and moves briskly enough that it never threatens to bore, but it's hard to feel much of anything about the characters and, when it's all over, there's a sense that everything that happens is obligatory. Thor is essentially Marvel's answer to Superman and, as with The Man of Steel, it can be difficult to craft a tale around a hero who is essentially invincible.

    The enemy this time around is Malekith (Christopher Eccleston), the King of the Dark Elves, who may be the worst developed villain in any Marvel movie. His motives are Blofeld-esque on a grand scale: use the power of the indestructible Aether to blast the nine realms back into primordial darkness. Having failed once in the time of Thor's grandfather, he's back to try again. He has a henchman or two and drives around in space in a really big ship equipped with a cloaking device.

    Buried under pounds of prosthetics and makeup, Christopher Eccleston (who once played the ninth Doctor Who) is unrecognizable. He growls his lines with appropriate Bane-like menace, although there aren't many of them. It begs the question of why the filmmakers bothered with a "name" actor when not even his family will recognize him. As a character, Malekith is about as one-dimensional as a villain can be. His backstory is truncated and he's not given enough screen time to be more than passingly menacing. The only thing interesting about him is when he goes one-on-one with Thor (Chris Hemsworth) in an admittedly fun battle that has the two of them popping through space from planet to planet (with Thor's hammer desperately trying to catch up).

    The screenplay neatly dispenses with the elephant in the room of "where are the rest of The Avengers?" (an issue that hamstrung Iron Man 3) by having most of the action take place off-planet. Asgard is nicely rendered although it seemed more grandiose when Kenneth Branagh envisioned it in the first Thor. This time around, director Alan Taylor sees it as a smaller, less majestic place. Perhaps that's necessary to the story. The kinds of indignities suffered by the gods this time around might not have worked in Branagh's version of the realm.

    Two characters enable Thor: The Dark World to occasionally transcend the generic mediocrity that defines this endeavor. Tom Hiddleston's Loki, making his third appearance, has grown so comfortable in the role that he's able to steal every scene in which he appears. Thor: The Dark World comes to life when Hiddleston is on screen and his interaction with Hemsworth evidences far more chemistry than the rather feeble spark evident between Thor and his lady love, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman). Then there's Kat Dennings' sharp-tongued Darcy, who is by far the most interesting secondary character not named Loki. I'd love to see a movie in which Darcy and Loki team up and go on an adventure - it would be worth the price of admission for the actors alone.

    Thor: The Dark World is occasionally elevated by the moments when it plants tongue in cheek and decides not to take itself too seriously. Hiddleston and Dennings' dialogue is often representative of this as are scenes when Thor literally hangs up his hammer or boards a train in the London underground and asks directions. In fact, it's possible to make a compelling case that the film is at its best when it's taking a break from the primary storyline.

    Thor: The Dark World is really just a placeholder to keep fans from losing interest between The Avengers and its sequel. This movie, like Iron Man 3, might have worked better had it existed outside the long shadow cast by Joss Whedon's massive team up. Once a franchise enters the realm of the epic, it's hard to satisfy by backtracking and there are only so many times a hero (or group of heroes) can face Armageddon without it becoming redundant. Thor: The Dark World delivers in a generic superhero fashion by offering a couple hours' diversion (with inter-credits and post-credits scenes to keep butts in seats for the entire running time) but one can be excused for finding the overall experience a little stale.
    Expand
  25. Nov 17, 2013
    5
    "Thor: The Dark Word" is a new sequel by the first movie of "Thor" and a crossover spinoff by "The Avengers," but unfortunately the movie is very weak for me that a lot of people seem to enjoy this overhyped film. This sequel is about a brave superhuman who enters a darkish humanity to face against the dark elves who wants to conquer the universe. Thor (Chris Hemsworth) returns as a"Thor: The Dark Word" is a new sequel by the first movie of "Thor" and a crossover spinoff by "The Avengers," but unfortunately the movie is very weak for me that a lot of people seem to enjoy this overhyped film. This sequel is about a brave superhuman who enters a darkish humanity to face against the dark elves who wants to conquer the universe. Thor (Chris Hemsworth) returns as a handsome mythological prince who wants to see his true love, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) in England, and he's trying to find a Nine Realms in the big bloated planet. The movie drags down with silly humor, corny dialogue, and some unpleasant scenes, where Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Starsgard) is running crazy with his naked body and he started to become a lunatic. I would say whatever happen to this scene? Does the doctor goes insane while he left away from The Avengers that they didn't known about him? The main villain named Malekith (Christopher Eccleston) is part of the dark universe and he 's one of the most boring characters in this movie, it goes very slow for this plot, even Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is having fun for his character since they make him interested villain from the "The Avengers." Thor: The Dark World is an underwhelming superhero film with corny forgettable characters, a dull story, and some tiring moments. I would prefer "The Avengers," or an okay version from Kenneth Branagh's "Thor." One of the main problems is that the film turns into corky uninteresting mess, when does the film turns so corky that doesn't take to serious. Thor: The Dark World is not a memorable superhero like the other Marvel Universe series, even it's more less convenience like "Man of Steel" or "The Wolverine." So the search I still on until we get to next Avengers sequel or any spinoff characters in Marvel. Expand
  26. Nov 29, 2013
    6
    Thor The Dark World is a decent flick. The film has some good action scenes, likeable characters (especially Loki), nice presentation, and some fun scenes. However, the film is bogged down by a slow first half and a couple scenes that might be a little too dark. Thankfully, though there is enough entertainment/good stuff to make the movie enjoyable. I’m glad I saw it but don’t think I’mThor The Dark World is a decent flick. The film has some good action scenes, likeable characters (especially Loki), nice presentation, and some fun scenes. However, the film is bogged down by a slow first half and a couple scenes that might be a little too dark. Thankfully, though there is enough entertainment/good stuff to make the movie enjoyable. I’m glad I saw it but don’t think I’m going to see it again. If you are a fan of these movies you’ll enjoy it just fine if not there is nothing here to change your mind. As it stands this is one of the weaker films of the Marvel Cinematic Universe but not a bad one making it worth a watch for fans of the genre but that’s about it Expand
  27. Nov 12, 2013
    6
    Overall I felt it was just a descent film. The acting was excellent, the action scenes were pretty epic, but I think it was the story that didn't mesh well. The first Thor was good because of the solid story even though it had some silly scenes here and there.

    Again, awesome scenery, action, and acting but the story/villain didn't work for me in this one so I'm giving it a 6.
  28. Nov 20, 2013
    5
    I basically got what I expected out of this movie: a bunch of pretty people talking and fighting over things which I couldn't care less about. This movie has plenty of action and special effects, but those are ultimately wasted because they mostly involve characters or locations that we simply don't know or sympathize with. The main problem with this franchise is that it tries to split ourI basically got what I expected out of this movie: a bunch of pretty people talking and fighting over things which I couldn't care less about. This movie has plenty of action and special effects, but those are ultimately wasted because they mostly involve characters or locations that we simply don't know or sympathize with. The main problem with this franchise is that it tries to split our attention between two different realms, but fails to adequately develop either. I will say, however, that Loki is delightful, as always, and there are some very funny moments this time. Expand
  29. Nov 8, 2013
    6
    Bear in mind I have never seen Thor, the original movie, but from what I heard, that movie was somewhat middle of the road. The Dark World appears to not move past that mindset, but at least they did it in a competent fashion.

    Plot is simplistic and predictable, but the execution was moderate. Simple good vs. evil battle but the pacing and unfolding of events kept me distracted enough.
    Bear in mind I have never seen Thor, the original movie, but from what I heard, that movie was somewhat middle of the road. The Dark World appears to not move past that mindset, but at least they did it in a competent fashion.

    Plot is simplistic and predictable, but the execution was moderate. Simple good vs. evil battle but the pacing and unfolding of events kept me distracted enough. However, some of the secondary plots are quite head scratching. The romance "triangle" between Thor, Jane and that Asgardian female is mentioned, but not shown in great detail and is left as pointless tripe given that it fell apart by the second act. Although it is refreshing to see Loki once again seizing opportunity that passes by, and that is a secondary plot that has effected the movie entirely. The post credits scene (a staple given that it will lead to Avengers 2), does provide a few hints of how this movie's McGuffin would be used in the coming Avengers film.

    The characters are very 2 dimensional and flat, with the exception of Loki. What I despise most of the characters however were the Earth humans with the exception of Natalie Portman, and even she is somewhat guilty of this. In the movie, she is clearly there are nothing but a traditional damsel-in-distress. Think of her time as Padme in Star Wars, but at least she has some function. In fact, anytime the movie transitions away from Asgard, the humans only fulfill a comic role. In this sense, it was suffering the Transformers disease; superfluous characters that have nothing to do with the main plot providing comedy. Although it isn't done excessively, and they actually have some use in the climax, it is still very obvious that the writers have no idea what to do with them.

    Special effects was passable. Fight choreography and action was almost above average. Particularly memorable was Thor's mother fighting, or the two brothers fighting side-by side. But CGI is quite possible the most horrible I've seen this year. You will never believe any artifact produced actually existed in the real world. The alien ships look poorly rendered compared to those in Star Trek or Man of Steel. Thor's hammer look comically plastic and unbelievable. The "sandstorms" are just clouds of opaque smoke without any resolution or clarity to define the finer details. It's clear CG was not very well refined.

    Overall, this is a simple popcorn movie that is enjoyable as long as you do not expect anything above average from it. Otherwise be disappointed by flat characters, shoddy CGI, and unnecessary padded content from characters that clearly should have waited for the third act, or the writer did not bother to fill their time on screen with something more productive (hint: nudity isn't nice to watch). But even with low expectations, I do not have a strong impression of the movie once I left the theater. Leaves no lasting impressions, beyond possible future plot points for other Marvel crossovers.
    Expand
  30. Mar 10, 2014
    5
    While I would like to say that this movie was better than the first one, on the whole it's about the same. Story is interesting and there is allot of Thor comic lore to keep fans engaged, but the writing and script are dead weak. Aside from Thor, there is very, very, very, little character development. Granted this is OK for the main characters as they were firmly established in theWhile I would like to say that this movie was better than the first one, on the whole it's about the same. Story is interesting and there is allot of Thor comic lore to keep fans engaged, but the writing and script are dead weak. Aside from Thor, there is very, very, very, little character development. Granted this is OK for the main characters as they were firmly established in the previous films, but with the focus now being on Asgard, there is allot of new elements to the universe that are barely touched upon.

    Loki feels tacked on and seems utterly needless. With a dead obvious plot twist that anyone with half a brain would see coming a mile away. Clearly he is there as a fan service and to draw in the ladies (no idea what they see in him, but if that's what they like.)

    The villain is so generic and really gets little due. Clearly he is there as a plot device and more or less feels like something for Thor to do, than an actual threat. At least Loki had charm and was fun to watch in his scenes.

    The visual effects are utterly gorgeous and the production team do a fantastic job bring Asgard to life. A shame they couldn't have done the same with the script.

    Overall:
    If I didn't know any better, I would have thought this was a "made-for-TV" movie. Everything looks good, and it follows a typical comic book formula, but considering this is a Marvel movie, I had expected allot better.

    An entertaining, if somewhat average movie that delivers on the visuals but crashes with a flimsy script and lackluster plot.
    Expand
Metascore
54

Mixed or average reviews - based on 44 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 22 out of 44
  2. Negative: 3 out of 44
  1. Reviewed by: James Berardinelli
    Nov 8, 2013
    63
    The movie is pretty to look at in a "Transformers" sort of way and moves briskly enough that it never threatens to bore, but it's hard to feel much of anything about the characters and, when it's all over, there's a sense that everything that happens is obligatory.
  2. Reviewed by: Peter Rainer
    Nov 8, 2013
    58
    My favorite moment in the movie: Astrophysicist Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard) insisting on wearing only his underwear because he says he thinks better that way. Hey, whatever works.
  3. Reviewed by: Mike Scott
    Nov 8, 2013
    40
    None of that is to say that Thor: The Dark World is a bad movie, necessarily. I would never speak ill of a man with a giant, magical hammer. At the same time, hammer or no hammer, it doesn't quite nail it, either.