User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 984 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 76 out of 984

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
  1. May 7, 2011
    The reason I loved Thor was because it performed well on a few fronts. The Special Effects are the best to date. Thor is portrayed very closely to his comic character, in terms of Powers, attitude,etc. The arc of th story was well laid out and the pacing was balanced. It was a brilliant way to bring a really fantastic un-real world of Marvel Comics and Norse Mythology into an almost plausible reality. Props to the principle cast, and Brannagh may be the ultimate reason this Stan Lee creation works so well on screen Expand
  2. May 7, 2011
    While Chris Hemsworth does a solid job and is charming, and his band of buddies is fun, the movie as a whole is just flat. Way too much focus on the solely CGI "other" world, and not enough on the human (or superhuman) interactions. Kat Dennings is terrific, but Natalie Portman's character just seems starstruck throughout, and she doesn't do much acting. Probably the best acting job in the film is done by Idris Elba as the guardian of "the bridge." The movie pales in comparison to the best of the new generation of superhero movies - Batman Begins, Iron Man, and Dark Knight - but it is fun, and much better than the crap-fest that was Iron Man II. I'd say it's worth a look to acquire the knowledge necessary to watch The Avengers next year.... Expand
  3. May 6, 2011
    Very entertaining. The opening sequence was obviously an homage to Lord of the Rings minus the 'epic' feel to it. I really loved all the Iron Man/Tony Stark, Hulk and The Avengers references. The emotional core of 'Thor' was surprisingly deep, it felt more human than the mechanical synthetic Iron Man 2. Loved the idea that a God can fall in love with a mortal woman. Chris Hemsworth is perfect for the role and has some really funny scenes walking around New Mexico as the God of Thunder (he's delusional to everyone around him). I'm more into the reality-based superheroes (Batman), but I really enjoyed Thor. If you've been reading the Marvel Comics than you'll definitely love this one. The only problem I had with this movie was the jumping between Asgard and earth, made it feel like it was two different movies simultaneously and not in a good way. Stick around after the end credits for an Avengers spoiler. The Avengers can't come soon enough, really excited for that one! Although this is no Batman Begins or the first Iron Man, it really works as an introduction of the God of Thunder into the Marvel Universe.

    Favorite scene: very touching moment between Thor and his Mjolnir.
  4. May 8, 2011
    Thor was so much better than I thought it would be. A lover of highbrow, thought provoking movies. Wow, this was so much fun!! I was worried about no substance, all action, etc. and yeah, it kind of is. But, come on it's science fiction and fantasy mixed and does a good job at both. What more could you want? Oh, yeah, the hottest guy to hit the screen since Brad Pitt. As a classical trained actor Thor comes across as a well educated, gallant, god of a man. Kenneth Braghnaugh combines the old and new with genuine laughs and only a few " Oh, no" groans at some cheesy lines. History buffs might me a little disappointed in the lack of backstories, but it finds it's way in in little patches. Hammer on God of Thunder!! Expand
  5. May 9, 2011
    I was surprised how much I liked the Norse mythology modern love story mash up. Hemsworth is a very credible Thor. His band of friends are fun to watch. I liked the two congruent stories, on earth and in Thor's home world. Anthony Hopkins was his usual credible self as Odin. Anyone could have played the Natalie Portman part, but she was fine, nothing special. Still, it was fun to watch. I'm glad I did not see it in 3D because it was very dark at times and that is a recipe for disaster in 3d. It was entertaining, light, did not take itself too seriously and was fun: great summer movie. Expand
  6. May 6, 2011
    Not a very good movie. Acting was good. Everything else sucked. Costumes, sucked. Plot, sucked. Special effects weren't very special. I can't believe someone said that the emotional core of 'Thor' was deep. The "love" affair in the movie was as completely contrived as one might expect. Just not a very good movie.
  7. May 7, 2011
    This movie was a complete waste of time. The action was uninspired and dull, the writing was nonexistent and the characters were completely flat. The only reason this movie existed was to give an origin story to Thor for next year's Avengers movie.
  8. May 25, 2011
    I thought it was superb but then I was already a fan before the movie's release. In my opinion the genius was in the casting. Anthony Hopkins as Odin was a master stroke and Chris Hemsworth's version of Thor had just the right amount of pomposity without being too over the top. I did think they missed a comedic opportunity with the Volstag character and took slight liberties with the storyline but those are really only a minor complaints. Overall Mr Branagh really captured the essence of the character which is pretty much all you can ask of a comic book recreation. I left the theater wanting more. Well done. Expand
  9. May 6, 2011
    What has made Nolan's Batman, as well as Favreau's Iron Man, movies so well-received has been because they have taken normal humans and had them rise into something bigger, making it more believable, no matter how outlandish. So when I heard Thor would be included, as he should, in the Avengers saga, especially with his own film, I was admittedly concerned that there was no way to maintain the integrity established by Nolan and Favreau and retain the strong story and audience. I was wrong. While not a perfect film, I cannot imagine a better handling of this mythological story and have it connect to the world today as perfectly as Kenneth Branagh's Thor. Expand
  10. May 8, 2011
    Yesterday night I had the honor of watching Thor, and if I had to describe the experience, I would day that I was geniunely impressed. Allow me to go through each key category in detail (without spoilers) to show you how impressive this movie was:

    Story: This film had a surprisingly good storyline to it. It wasn't exactly groundbreaking or even excellent in this area, but it didn't have
    to be. All that had to be done was for director Kenneth Branagh not to mess up. He didn't. 7/10

    Acting: This was the film's strong point. Each actor delivers a tremendous performence ESPECIALLY Chris Hemsworth as Thor and Tom Hiddleston as Loki. Loki plays out as a surprisingly complex character and Hiddleston steal every scene that he's in (no matter how briefly), however this movie belongs to Thor and Hemsworth assures that with his impressive performance. I also must mention Anthony Hopkins as Odin. Lastly, we have our (main?) villian, King Laufey, played by Colm Feore, who you should INSTANTLY recognize as the Lord Marshal from Chronicles of Riddick (They look EXACTLY the same). 9.5/10

    Visuals: Before I talk about visuals, I must mention that I saw this movie in 3D, and the only thing worth looking at in 3D is Natalie Portman, save your money and watch it in 2D. The CG in this movie was top notch, however, it's Asguard that shows the visual capabilities of this film and of film in general. Seeing Asgurd was when this film first impressed me, and it is a sight to behold.This movie is one of the best looking out there. 9/10

    Sound: Loud. 8/10 Action: Top notch. This wasn't some drunken editing hell like Harry Potter 7, this was fun, fluid action. The only problem is that there was less action than expected, and the biggest action scene happens around 10 minutes in. 8/10.

    Overall: This movie kicks ass, and does it in style. It again lives up to Marvel's high standards for Comic Book films. 8.5/10 (for Metacritic's sake, I'll round i up to 9)
  11. Jun 29, 2011
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. "Now is the [summer] of our discontent." As pertaining to classically-trained Shakespearean actors starring in "high-concept" movies soon after the phenomenal success of "Jaws", surely it was Alec Guinness, who may have first thought those words on the set of "Star Wars", playing Obi-Wan Kenobi, a film and role he utterly despised. If not for the great white shark that terrorized Amity Beach vacationers just two years earlier, which put an end to the golden age of director-driven movies, Guinness, who played Exeter opposite Laurence Olivier in "Henry V" and then the title role in "Romeo and Juliet", probably wouldn't feel impelled to go anywhere near a light saber or a wrinkly green Jedi. Thirty years later, "selling out" has a new name; it's called "rebranding". And so it goes. Kenneth Branagh, director of the much-ballyhooed "Hamlet", could conceivably have said, "How did I come to this? I played Richard the Third,"(it was actually Alan Rickman in "Galaxy Quest"), because even though Asgard is a long ways off from the Crucible Theater(where Branagh played the Machiavellian king), "Thor", conversely, is also a long ways off from rubbing elbows with the likes of "Daredevil", "Ghost Rider" and "Catwoman". So even though nobody who knows Branagh in his previous incarnation as an Anglophile would be in his right mind to give him "five curtain calls"(like Rickman's Alexander Dane, who plays the Spockish alien Dr. Lazarus in the "Star Trek"-inspired show-within-the movie) for dumbing down with a movies that was motivated by careerism, this high-profile booster of Shakespeare's plays, as a trade-off, has earned himself some hearty applause from the discriminating fanboy, who may be unschooled in the works of the Bard, but can name every superhero in the comic book universe. Unlike Arnold in "Conan the Barbarian", the audience is laughing with Chris Hemsworth, not at him. Personality-wise, the title character is more Dark Horse than Dark Knight. In other words, Branagh uses comic relief as a counterpoint to the obligatory action set-pieces, in very much the same manner as "Hellboy". You don't take Batman to a diner for food and drink, or "sustenance", as Thor puts it, because if the Caped Crusader smashed a glass to the floor, patrons would be heading for the exit in droves. Unencumbered by childhood angst, Thor takes his new surroundings in stride, sporting a convivial spirit you wouldn't expect from a man of the tenth century. The Norse god is also a known entity to the world at-large. In the Guillermo del Toro original, Hellboy is immortalized in comic books("They never get the eyes right," the red creature muses aloud), whereas Thor inspires Erik Selvig, Jane's mentor, to check out "Myths and Legends of the Norse Gods" from the public library. But this isn't your grandfather's Asgard. The capital city of the Norse gods is the gaudiest thing this side of "Flash Gordon". Appropriately enough, Thor looks like a prototypical tight end, a football player, as was Flash, a QB, who finds himself on the planet Mongo, making like Fran Tarkenton in the court of Ming the Merciless, because Hans Zarkov knew that nefarious forces could be behind an unexpected total eclipse of the sun and a moon gone rogue. Resembling Zarkov, she alone keeps chasing wormholes in the New Mexico desert, because both scientists on the fringe believe that science fiction and science fact could very well be one and the same. As a result, she is more willing to accept the existence of Asgard than her hypothetical-minded colleague. When Odin banishes his war-mongering son to earth, the mode in which he travels through the space-time continuum(the body itself as a ship) resembles the interplanetary trip that the television actors make in "Galaxy Quest". Since Eric acknowledges the Norse god solely in its guise as a literary figure, and not the Avenger of Marvel lore, a juxtaposition presents itself, in which popular culture is shown to have replaced literature as the stuff that fuels young people's dreams. Whereas Eric, as a child, believed in something he read in a book, the young fan in "Galaxy Quest" swears that the cheesy space opera, something he saw on TV, is real, a surrogate religion. For the alien envoy who confuses the show for "historical documents"(read: Bible), it's religion personified, going so far as remaking themselves in God's image. For Brandon, receiving the transmission from the captain is akin to being a prophet, doing God's work from earth while the starship captain and his crew do battle in the celestial heavens. "Galaxy Quest" works as a metaphor for the validation of Scientology as a religion. In "Thor", the god that figures prominently in primitive Germanic religions, is recast in a sci-fi setting, so when Thor and his friends manifest themselves on earth, the Norse creation myth is validated. It's "Dianetics" in disguise. Expand
  12. May 10, 2011

    In all honesty I was kind of reluctant going into Thor. I'm not a huge fan of all the superhero movies coming out but I do like the idea of the combined Avengers one that Marvel seems to be working towards and after watching both Iron Mans...well, guess I should give the whole universe a shot. Although Natalie Portman helped my
    decision as well.

    So while I didn't go in with the openest of minds, I will say I did enjoy it. The action scenes were amazing as I knew they would be, combine that with the spectacular visuals of the other realms and this movie was very visually appealing (and this is without Portman mind you) so that alone was great. Not a movie you'd fall asleep in. I also really liked, again, the subtle notions towards the Avengers grand plot. Whether it was referring back to some scenes from Iron Man or even slight comments about the Hulk and others, very nice touch I always appreciate in movies. I guess my only down points to the movie would be the slowness of progression at some points. Mainly at the beginning but usually all the scenes when they were in the other world. It looked amazing..but not much going on there which kind of bored me. Another issue was some of the comedic relief...just didn't seem to bode well in some circumstances.

    Overall a great continuation of the Avengers series and great Superhero movie as well.
  13. May 6, 2011
    Great visuals, epic scenery and amazing CGI work, but it gets ruined by some mediocre script and awful plot (I watched it in 3D). Great start to the movie is ruined by predictable story. Its an entertaining flick if you don't mind spending extra for 3D and are not looking for a great plotline. Has good jokes and overall a nice touch to it. Good casting , but could have been better. I'll give it 5/10 Expand
  14. May 6, 2011
    I saw the movie. One word... Amazing. Branagh captures the essence of the comic and delivers a film that could be a strong contender to be the blockbuster of the summe...
  15. Sep 14, 2011
    Pertaining heavily lethargic action, unfunny humor, and a flat story that contains only 2 backgrounds (human world and the world of gods), Marvel rewrites summer blockbuster "Thor"'s preposterous comic odyssey into a f***ed up one.
  16. May 6, 2011
    Mediocre and boring. Visually it has some good and some bad, but the real failure is in the story and the direction of actors. The story is a complete frankenstein where none of the parts works even by itself, and much less in group.
  17. May 17, 2011
    Great movie. Great balancing of action and comedy. It definitely is as good as Iron Man. Marvel proves once again that they are the only ones who can treat their properties the way they deserve. I wish there had been less Earth and more Asgard but overall quite a good and enjoyable movie.
  18. May 22, 2011
    I wouldn't be surprised if someone told me this movie took only a couple weeks to make. The story was absolute garbage. None of the brother jealously got fleshed out until the end. The government cover up didn't add anything to the plot, and the wishy washy romance was so unnecessary and shallow it just made you wonder why Natalie portman's character even needed to be in the movie. I believe the only reason they made this movie was to provide some sort of backstory for when they release The Avengers. But this was not well developed nor does there appear to be any time or effort spent by the writers. Acting and production quality was good but what an awful story. Expand
  19. May 7, 2011
    When i first came across this film, i thought this was gonna be cool. I am a big marvel fan so i decided to see it. It was amazing!! The special effects were excellent! The action was amazing! The acting was good. I mean I had a great time at the movies! Overall awesome.

  20. Sep 5, 2011
    Based on the marvel character of the same name, this live-action movie tells the story about Thor, a noble warrior who gets exiled by his father Odin to live on earth amongst the humans. There, he meets a scientist named Jane Foster, who teaches him lessons as his brother plots to send out his dark forces and take over all of Asgard. It is up to Thor to regain his strength and save the two worlds.

    I caught the screening of this movie almost four months ago and enjoyed it. Now to my opinion.

    Bad: Some of the scenes have product placements like the 7-Eleven store, the Burger King soda drink, and it even had an IPOD mention. The story was lacking and the ending was too clichéd.

    Good: The actors were very good at their performances. Chris Hemsworth was very compelling as Thor and he had enough screen time. Natalie Portman was a lot of fun as Jane Porter and she was very funny. Tom Hiddleston was entertaining as Loki and had a lot of talent and Anthony Hopkins was also entertaining as Odin. The CGI and the settings were pretty good and the action scenes were amazing.

    Thor may not be the best movie of 2011, but it lives up to its potential of the comic books with neat special effects, solid acting, and great action scenes.

  21. May 7, 2011
    This was the worst of the Marvel Studio movies so far... let me list the ways: why are the frost giants sooo human-like and small? why do the action scenes suck? where are all the asgardians(there may have been 20 total)? And most importantly why was there no character in the entire movie that was an actual threat to Thor? Thor with his hammer could easily beat any of his nemesis in this flick...LAME! Expand
  22. Sep 15, 2011
    I had a blast watching this, it not only has some amazing special effects, but extremely enjoyable characters, these are some of Marvels most human characters yet, it can be genuinely funny, somewhat touching, and backs it all up with some awesome fights, and I just love the references to the other super heroes, like Iron Man (and was that Hawkeye?!), and the way it brings you closer to the future Avengers movie, honestly the most disappointing part was the ending, and it leaves the question of what's next for Thor? but this is still an awesome movie, and a perfect see for fans of Marvel. Expand
  23. May 6, 2011
    I saw Thor last night and it was done very well from a Comic standpoint! All the actors have played well together, very well. This turned out to be a fantastic Origins film. I would for sure recommend this Movie to anyone who is actively seeking a very entertaining, Comic movie!

    Watched in 3D
  24. May 8, 2011
    A good job telling a very difficult story, both of my kids were on the edge of their seats for the battle scenes. I thought the acting was good and look forward to seeing more.
  25. Jan 22, 2012
    Thor is about a powerful but arrogant warrior whose reckless actions reignite an ancient war. As a result, Thor is banished to Earth where he is forced to live among humans. When the most dangerous villain of his world sends its darkest forces to invade Earth, Thor learns what it takes to be a true hero. Although the film is undeniably cheesy Thor is extremely entertaining, action packed and funny and features a fantastic debut performance from Chris Hemsworth and a charming performance from Kat Dennings. Although Natalie Portman just won herself an Oscar her character is cliche and that is the exact performance she has brought us. It seems Natalie is going back to her old bad acting ways like Star Wars. I give this film 88% of a good movie. Expand
  26. May 6, 2011
    very nice , it had some really good stuff and i never relized there were some many thing related to thor , there were so many charaters and so many things goint on that it was very entertainging. the plot was hard to follw maybe becuase i went to see it at 10 pm, but thats llife
  27. May 19, 2011
    There is something very distinctive about Thor's character that was missing in this movie. He wasn't as arrogant as he should have been and way too sappy towards the end. While Jane's character did not add anything to the overall plot. Yes her Jane is a major character in Thor-lore, it was just superfluous in this instance. The movie is fun to watch though, i wish the battles were a little bigger. And what happened to the cry "Have at thee ....."? Expand
  28. May 8, 2011
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Maybe not "Iron Man" good, but certainly "Iron Man 2" good. A great rendition of a famous, if not popular, Marvel character. I can't think of a better Thor than Hemsworth (though young Thor maybe could've been played by that "Little Hercules" kid). I was leery of Portman in a Marvel movie but she did good. In fact, the entire cast was quite well chosen: from Odin to Loki to Frigga. They *are* missing one very beloved Norse god (can you guess which one?) But I figure a third Odinson would mess up the plot (don't laugh, there is enough plot to hold it together). The critics were kind of right about scenes on Earth being more dynamic than the ones in Asgard, but the continuous switching between the two keeps this balanced. I thought Asgard a little too sterile to be the viking "heaven" (I was hoping for some hot valkyries), but their rendition of Bifrost works great. The mythology is dealt with exactly as I would have: the Asgardians never refer to themselves as gods. Though the frost giants were a bit puny to be "giants". Marvel continues the trend of strong female characters (Aunt May, Betsy Ross et al) with Jane Foster. I dig the hilarious female sidekick Darcy (Kat Dennings). And Sif (Jaimie Alexander) is a knockout. The rest of Thor's pals were also faithful to the comic. And so were the helmet designs. I miss some of the classic battle cries (For Odin! For Asgard!) but I suppose those went out along with beardless Thor. Still, the fanboys should be pleased with references to Donald Blake and the effect of spinning Mjollnir. Thor could've come off very badly, but it actually ends up standing well on its own. I'm sure it'll rake in big at the box office this weekend, but Thor isn't one of the characters that is easy to make sequels for. This will probably be the one and only. That alone would be a good reason to see it. On top of that, you know that if you're looking forward to Avengers, you're going to have to see all of these solo outings! Expand
  29. May 6, 2011
    About as dumb as these type of movies get. Nothing in Thor is remotely memorable, jaw-dropping, or exciting. But at the same time, it's not mind-numbingly boring either. It has the bare minimum amount of effort put into the story, and CGI stuffed into all the parts where the story drags. Speaking of dragging, why is there a romance in this? Hell, why are there human characters in this? They're written flatter than cardboard. Calling their performances wooden is giving them too much credit. What else is wrong with it? The action scenes are shot clumsily, making it way to hard to see what's going on, the special effects seemt unfinished, many scenes were blurry and hard to see (may have been our print of film or projector, so I'll give that a pass). In the end, Thor is just and thunder and no lighting. If you're looking for the next Iron Man, look elsewhere. Expand
  30. May 6, 2011
    Better than the Iron Man movies, and the best Marvel movie since 2008's The Incredible Hulk. Loki may stand alongside Final Fantasy's Sephiroth as one of the best villains ever! I have a very good feeling now about Captain America and The Avengers. And don't worry, the post-converted 3D was actually done well. Two thumbs up!
  31. May 11, 2011
    It was an ok movie, but the problem was that it sold itself as an action movie, not the drama that I got. I will say that the characters had good chemistry and everything seemed to go well together. The main problem that i had with the plot was that they started it with WTF moment, and then explained with an hour long flashback, totally taking away the mystery factor that we were going to be presented with. Even though this movie had some major flaws, you must remember that this is merely a necessary step in the road to the Avengers movie. I certainly hope that Captain America will be better. Expand
  32. May 10, 2011
    The mythological God of Thunder (Chris Hemsworth) is cast out of his kingdom and becomes a mortal on Earth. This flick has a lot going for it: magnificent art direction, moments of down-to-earth humor, extravagant spectacle and newcomer Hemsworth's undeniable charisma (not to mention that body). On the down side: the fight scenes are an indistinct blur and the drama drags down the pacing. Overall, it's uneven, but entertaining. NOTES: I didn't bother with the 3D and didn't miss a thing. Stay thru the credits for another "Avengers" teaser. Expand
  33. May 28, 2011
    I love superhero films, but this is certainly one of the weaker Marvel entries. The film suffers from wildly inconsistent changes in tone, going from silly to deadly serious sometimes in the midst of a scene. The special effects also were inconsistent, sometimes looking cartoonish.
  34. May 24, 2011
    I love the super-hero movie genre and I love fantasy action. I didn't think this movie would be much and I was right. First off, I never felt Thor as a god but more of an arrogant jock. Even at the end, that feeling never left. Action wise, it was great four years ago. Here it all felt dated especially coming behind two Iron Man movies and Incredible Hulk. The story didn't do it justice. On the one hand there is Thor and the jealous brother Loki. This could have been better except it feels like they are stuck at 12 years old. On the other hand, there is the relationship between Thor and Natalie Portman's character. It was really forced and cliched. Not to mention a love scene put in for no good reason. Idris Elba's character was great and should have been givin more to do. Odin was also really good and the only "god" in the movie. Special Effects looked awsome but a pretty picture wasn't enough to pull me in. I know this movie is only to provide insight as to how Thor becomes and Avenger, but it could have been better than this. Expand
  35. Jun 19, 2011
    Thor had solid acting, including a breakthrough performance by Chris Hemsworth, great action, solid humor, and a good ending. However, Thor also suffered from some pacing issues and some scenes that take you out of the experience. Nonetheless, this is still a movie worth watching and is a solid adaptation before The Avengers comes out next year.
  36. May 29, 2011
    Exciting, captivating, visually stunning.

    These are just a few words that help sum up the superhero epic "Thor".

    The acting is sublime and the directing seems more than perfect, this is probably the best superhero movie made, sitting beside The Dark Knight of course!
  37. May 17, 2011
    Very weak movie. Subpar acting, plot not at all in the spirit of the comic! Since when was Thor about romance? And why, good gods, WHY is there a black man playing a Norse god? I suppose it's ok for asian communities to get their panties in a twist over Avatar the last airbender and Caucasians, but the opposite? Not so much, I suppose...
  38. May 7, 2011
    The movie is flawed but thoroughly enjoyable. It has a certain charm to it that you have to see it in order to appreciate it. It has a little bit of everything, romance, action and drama. The visual effects are superb and the characters are pretty likeable.

    Highly recommended.
  39. May 9, 2011
    Bhoring. The sets are straight out of "Flash Gordon." The plot is straight out of "Masters of the Universe." The direction is straight out of the Joel Schumacher school of filmmaking.
  40. May 14, 2011
    This film was awesome. It was as entertaining as the first Iron Man.The action was crafted well and the acting was great too. Kenneth Branagh was a perfect fit to direct this film and I can't wait for the Avengers
  41. Jun 26, 2011
    Silly Marvel fun. My children (8 and 9) really enjoyed it. I did not have high expectations for the film but enjoyed it. I was not impressed by 3D rendering and found it distracting.
  42. Aug 26, 2011
    I have enjoyed every marvel comic turned action adventure movie since X-Men. They haven't always been great but they have always been fun and entertaining. This movie was anything but. Chris Hemsworth is terrible. The relationship between Thor and his father is weakly developed even though it is critical to the plot. The chemistry between Natalie Portman and Hemsworth is nonexistent. The story moves at a snails pace and the action sequences are lacking any semblance of potency or originality. It looks like all the fight choreography was stole from a Jet Li movie. The battle with the giant red eyed robot is laughable. And, the final confrontation with Loki made me wish I had a bridge to jump off of as well. Hopefully, Hemsworth won't ruin The Avengers next year. With any luck, all of his speaking parts will find their way to the cutting room floor. Expand
  43. Sep 29, 2011
    Fun action movie. don't try and break it down and analyze it. the movie is meant to entertain and be a fun movie about THE GOD OF THUNDER!!!!!! if you wanna chill out to a cool action movie this is a good choice.
  44. Nov 15, 2011
    To say that Thor is a bad superhero movie is wrong but saying it's the greatest superhero movie is also wrong. Though I enjoyed Chris Hemsworth as Thor and I found everyone to be not as enthusiastic as Thor himself particularly Kat Dennings character who just was annoying and made to many references to todays society. the CGI effects are terrific particularly the Asgard scenes. Nice little cameo from Hawkeye for next years Avengers film and Samuel L. Jackson makes another appearance as Nick Fury which is pretty cool. Overall the was ok just a few things wrong with it. hopefully the Avengers and Thor 2 in 2013 will sort things out. I look forward to seeing Hemsworth work with RDJ and Chris Evans next year Expand
  45. Sep 25, 2012
    When I went to the cinema to see it not that eager tubiera ... But pay to see this crap? By God, you freak! It is very bad and ridiculous. With a plot that looks like the movie "Enchanted".
  46. Aug 10, 2013
    Not as good as I first remembered but still a highly entertaining film. There is plenty to like here as Thor is one of my favourite characters from 'The Avengers' line-up and I find I can enjoy this film as apposed to the likes of the 'Iron-Man' series. There isn't a great deal of Action for a film that you would expect to have a lot of it, but the final few scenes is where it picks up. Overall a very good film and I am quite looking forward to the sequel later this year! Expand
  47. Jun 4, 2011
    Really entertaining. Not even totally sure why but it was great. It's about as entertaining as any comic movie can be. I'll reserve 8 -10 for comic book movies on par with the Dark Knight.
  48. Sep 15, 2011
    thor over all was a ok movie it had a ok plot , ok acting , and some pretty good action . the best part of the movie is probubly the first 30 min . it opens up great but then kinda goes down abit once thor gets to earth. mainly because he starts off as a ego maniac who cares for nothing but kicking ass . then all of a sudden he turns into this kind gentle man who wants to save every one with nothing in the film that explains why all of a sudden he makes this change in his i said its a ok film that if you into the comic book films you will probubly find it alright . Expand
  49. May 6, 2011
    Thor is just okay superhero movie, but it's not that great just like the rest of the superhero movies. I did enjoy the action scenes and the setting looks pretty good, but I didn't see in 3D because it gets too much flashy scenes everywhere and why everybody else wanted to see this movie in 3D? The new actor who played the Thor is okay and he's very over the top, but way too much over the top just like the rest of the cast. Some scenes are laughable and it could be much more fun. I didn't enjoy the story and the most of the characters, it gets fall flat, but not that bad. Okay movie and it's a little bit good, it wouldn't be near as Iron Man or The Incredible Hulk. I hope the new The Avengers will be good until next year. Expand
  50. May 16, 2011
    Looks like they sent in the B team to do this one, I hope that means that the A Team is responsible for making Captain America because it's going to be a real shame if they don't get that one right!!
  51. Jan 28, 2012
    I've never read a Thor comic and I expected this movie to be dire, in fact I was pleasantly surprised, it's not as bad as it could (or should - the idea of Thor sounds ropey) have been. I thought the visuals of Asgard were fantastic, they managed to somehow make a mythological realm of the gods actually feel 'real'. It left me wanting to see more adventures with Thor in.
  52. Sep 30, 2011
    I was hoping this movie would follow in the path of movies like the dark knight, x-men, or spiderman series but instead it is more in line with the hulk, ugggh. The whole movie was a snore, lots of cgi that looks like you have seen a thousand time before. Thor's character was corny, the script was poor with lots of stupid dialog that made it more like a cartoon script. Definitely don't buy, maybe rent. Expand
  53. May 11, 2011
    I saw this flick in a brand new IMAX 3D theatre with 28,000 watts of audio and was more impressed by the sheer power of the sound track than what was transpiring on screen.
  54. Oct 24, 2013
    Surprisingly I really enjoyed Thor. It is dense, two hours dense; these aren’t the greatest characters in the world; and the dutch angle can get annoying. However, I’m willing to overlook these flaws because the main characters are for the most part likeable and well acted with Chris Hemsworth killing at as for, some nice character moments as opposed to a whole action fest, some enjoyable action, and some epic moments. If you’re a fan of superhero movies check this one out, which is easier than ever since it is on Netflix as I am writing this. Even if you don’t think it’s as good as Iron Man you’ll still be really entertained. If you aren’t a fan of the superhero movies than you can sit this one out since this one isn’t doing anything ground breaking that’ll change your mind. As for me, like I said before, I really enjoyed this film. It did a fantastic job establishing Thor and got me excited for The Avengers. Hopefully the sequel will surprise me as well although it has a lot to live up to if it wants to be as entertaining as this film. Expand
  55. Jul 26, 2011
    This movie was very entertaining. It had its moments. Although not a comedy movie we will never forget the moment when the interrogation was happening as we still laugh at that joke (albeit it may not have been intended as a joke). I didn't see the real point of it being in 3D as it was not nearly as entertaining as other movies in terms of being 3D. Nonetheless this story and the action in it was great. Again, it could have been better though. Expand
  56. Dec 29, 2011
    i hated this movie. i just really didnt like it, i was annoyed when i watched it. the visuals were great, but that was the only good thing about the movie. the acting was bad, the story was messy, the "love story" (if you can ever call it that) was completely unbelievable and was were there so many tilted shots (it seemed like the movie had more tilted shots than normal horizontal shots.why??). it felt that the movie should have been split into two separate film, but that would have never worked. the only interesting thing was the lokki plot (that and the visuals are the only reason it has 3 ). i wouldnt recommend it to anyone. awful film. Expand
  57. May 6, 2011
    Thor is the God of Thunder , the movie was amazing , great cast and visual effect. I LOVE IT.I hope the C.America do the same with my mind lol and the Avengers.
  58. Aug 30, 2011
    It's harmless fun and a good way to zone out for an hour and a half one evening - but it's not going to win any awards :) Thor is actually a good actor - Portman is good and the supporting cast are fun too.
  59. Jul 10, 2011
    So much is done right in Thor that you forget what could have gone horribly wrong. The artistic flair exhibited in the other-worldly scenes is smashing. Get off your rear, and go out and enjoy a good old comic book action fest while it's still in theaters.
  60. May 7, 2011
    I'm right on par with the professional critics... When I first saw the trailers for Thor, I was surprised, underwhelmed, and BEYOND pessimistic. But I decided to feed the Big-Hollywood machine anyway, and go see it, because everyone else was going to. The result? I'll put it this way.... Considering the challenge of dealing with this particularly ridiculous comic-inspired storyline, while somehow tying in romantic interest and appealing to a broad audience... they did just about the best job they possibly could, which in my opinion, was "pretty decent." There are some continuity flaws and roll-your-eyes turning points, but most are manageable in this high-budget-low-brains context. I enjoyed the story, liked many of the battle scenes, and even laughed frequently as Thor stumbled to adjust to mortal life on Earth. Honestly, I feel that two of Hollywood's best talents, Portman and Hopkins, are really wasted here. You can get any pretty girl to spend two hours giggling and drooling at Hemsworth's muscles... and Hopkins's role, though executed flawlessly, perhaps should have been taken by a lesser-known actor, as to not overshadow Hemsworth's potential stardom. In sum: It's quite good, but not great. Certainly a worthy piece of entertainment, but not on the level with elite franchises such as the Spiderman and Batman movies. Expand
  61. May 9, 2011
    First and foremost, I have never been a big fan of superhero movies. I hated the Spiderman movies, liked but didn't love the Batman films, liked but didn't love the hulk movies, liked the first Iron man, hated the second. But this film really looked and felt like a comic book to me, which is the whole point. Most importantly, it actually had HUMOR. How refreshing. The special effects were great. There were moments where the background looked drawn, especially Thor's world (or realm as he called it), but that added to the "comic book" feel to me. I saw it in Digital IMAX 3D, and it looked fantastic. I can take or leave 3D but love IMAX so the 3D just came along for the ride. At first the Natalie Portman character seems thrown in for the inevitable Hollywood love interest, but in the end I liked that he fell in love with a mortal from earth, and it sets up the sequel. Newcomer Chris Hemsworth is terrific, and all the supporting acting is up to par. Lots of action in the film - you won't be bored. Expand
  62. May 12, 2011
    It was good. Better than I expected. At first, I thought it was going to suck. One thing ruined thing. Yeah, you know what I'm talking about. Every movie, I mean EVERY movie has a romance angle in it. Sure he kicked ass but jeezus. Come on, even the god of thunder gets a little. Ugh, I hate romance angles, it screws up movies.
  63. Nov 26, 2011
    While the main cast did a solid job, The CGI was absolutely terrible and looked very bad. The action was also pretty terrible as well. The franchise has a ton of potential though.
  64. May 18, 2011
    This is by no means an excellent movie, but it was entertaining. The art was fantastic, although the 3D didn't add much. The romance didn't make sense and was unnecessary....pretty unrealistic. They should of expanded on that aspect in order to get the plot they were looking for. The 3D end credits were amazing, worth seeing the movie just for that. Oh, and String Bell was a bas ass.
  65. Oct 26, 2011
    Could have been worse ... should have been better. Redeeming features: Idris Elba, Natalie Portman and Chris Hemsworth. Disappointing: poor acting by Anthony Hopkins (never thought I would say that but the role was too empty for him), unimpressed by Tom Hiddleston as Loki, whilst Kat Dennings was too under-utilised. She is an excellent young actress who only got a bit part.
    Less God of
    Thunder, and more God of Drizzle. Expand
  66. Oct 30, 2011
    by Satan that movie more absurd, nonsensical, badly directed, badly acted, inconsistent and not at all entertaining, the special effects were nothing surprising.
  67. May 13, 2011
    Maybe not the best "comic-book adaptation" movie of all time, but still hugely entertaining and just plain pop corn fun. A perfect start to "summer" flicks season. In 3D (which I sometimes despise as it 's not always necessary for a good movie) it looked fantastic, gorgeously crafted Asgard, the Ice world of Ice giants etc. all looked great. The characters were interesting and funny, in a good way, at times, the lead actor was solid and almost seemed perfect for the role a Thor. Just please don't take this flick seriously, it's made for simple, not stupid, mind you, FUN only. Expand
  68. May 7, 2011
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The movie didn't disappoint me in any way. Yet, it hasn't surprise me either.
    For me, it was good, I like mythology and all that stuff and the movie makes the parallel in a very good way. But it was a normal super-hero movie.
    It was good, but not that good.
  69. May 9, 2011
    Perhaps it's because I did not realise this was based on a comic before seeing the film, but I was just surprised by what this film ended up being. I'm not biased against comic book themed movies - in fact I generally like them - its just that the melding of ancient mythology, comic style and the 21st century seemed so odd. The story just does not stand up - in fact, it makes very little sense. The motivations of Loki were just incomprehensible and the transformation - seemingly in 5 minutes - of Thor from an arrogant war monger to a great leader and peacemaker was poorly done. The special effects in the film were impressive - but that's not really a plus these days, it's just a given - however, I thought the sound effects were poor, especially the continued high pitched 'electrical storm' sound effects that happened regularly. I found myself regularly wincing. Overall - not a film I would recommend. Expand
  70. May 8, 2011
    Well, it's not really a bad movie, it just has a hard time really deciding what it is trying to be, some of it was funny, some of it was action-y some of it seemed to be trying to be sad, and then there was some romance thrown in. Not a bad movie, not an intellectual movie, but really not that bad.
  71. Nov 17, 2013
    If you can set aside cynicism and stomach Thor's goofy premise, you'll be in for a sci-fi comic book treat. Those expecting it's dialogue and depth to match The Dark Knight will be left wanting (although Loki's Shakespearean tragedy play is awesome) But Thor isn't that type of movie. It's aspiration is to come as close to the comic books as possible (or possibly pay homage to 80s 'classics' like Flash Gordon or Krull). The movie really succeeds at this, feeling like it has just leaped off the page and into celluloid. It's exactly as it should be: Colorful, light, action packed and very, very daft. Thor is an extremely fun romp from start to finish and one of the most refreshing super hero movies of recent memory. Expand
  72. May 12, 2011
    When you look at "Thor" on paper, you see a film booming with all sorts of potential, intrigue, and an aptitude for something not yet seen from Marvel. Unfortunately, when you take the time to actually buy a ticket, sit down in your seat and prepare to relax, the film doesn't quite live up to such expectations. The film hem and haws at which time period it wants to delineate; the conjugality between ancient Norse mythology and the modern 21st century are muddled together very awkwardly. Aside from such befuddlement, "Thor" is highly entertaining and holds its Aryan head on the shoulders of Hemsworth, who does very well to steer the film's direction and provide ample laughs. After you begin to examine the film after abstaining from Hemworth's charisma and allure, you can't help but notice the amount of plot holes and ambiguity that are left lingering. The pace seemed rushed, omitting essential and "needed" elements to the film. Besides Thor's smashing of a coffee cup in the diner, the viewer is never introduced to the barbarism that is expected of a Norseman. Question concerning a multicultural Asgard also left me confused, but that was enough for me to shake off. Despite that tolerance, however, the film disregards any mention of how Thor is able to communicate and understand the jargon of 21st century America. The film begins to show the backwardness of Norse times (granted very poorly) as Hemsworth goes into a pet store looking for a horse. I found this to be a start in the right direction, until Portman's character yells "Need a lift?" To my surprise, Thor hops into a vehicle without any sort of amazement or consternation to the automotive advancement. Next, I can appreciate the film's attempts to include subtle humor to break up the, at times, constant ennui, but straying from the movie's ambiance to do so is brainless. When it is ever acceptable to mention the word "princess" as a means of insult in a Norse land, is the day that Batman is no longer rich. Yes, there are children at the movies too, this is true, but the rest of the scene into Odenheim is dreary, grave, and grim filled with grotesque, blood hungry Frost Giants--when is this a time to lower the film's rating to PG? I can't close without giving an honorable mention to two characters in the film: Loki and Jane Foster (Portman). With regards to Loki, I found him to be one of the most dynamic villains ever created in a Marvel film. In fact, he is so "well-rounded" that at times, I wasn't even sure if he was a villain. Yes, he was a trader, but you just couldn't help but feel sorry for him being the adopted and less-loved brother of Oden's real son; granted his character development was much greater than anyone else in the film. Jane Foster was also significant to the film's effectiveness in the captivating enchantment she feels for Thor. It is because of her (Portman)'s performance that Thor works so well and gives off such an amiable aura. All in all, "Thor" is Marvel's most intriguing comic book-to-movie creation yet to grace itself on the screen yet, however, it is also the most difficult to make. Because of the extreme degree of difficulty in explaining an entire mythology rather than one Gotham City, the film carries many plot holes, and for the exception of Loki, has a pretty basic character development. The CGI effects delineate an entricate world and make for a highly entertaining and "feel-good" action comic creation. Expand
  73. May 18, 2011
    The action was pretty solid, and Hemsworth did a good job conveying Thor. The actor playing Loki also did a great job. The love story though really detracted from it. No connection, and no real sense of them coming together, yet the movie tried to force down our throats that they'd fallen in love. And the big end scene where Thor's changed behavior was credited to Natalie Portman's character left me going, "Really?" Did I fall asleep for 15 minutes and miss the big scene where Thor learned about sacrificing for the greater good from her? I certainly didn't hate the movie and got some enjoyment from it, but I felt like ultimately, they needed a much better script. Plus a love interest that actually had some chemistry with Hemsworth. Expand
  74. May 15, 2011
    As someone who's seen the majority of big movies from 70's-2000's I found this to be the epitome of mass production in movies. Use pre-made material (the comic) as base and add the standard storyline. I called the general plot within first 5-10 minutes of movie without knowing anything about Thor. From there on everything was predictable. Including the romance and so-called twists. Every other scene also had some ultra-cheesy humor which tied in with the cheesy action which was sub-par in itself. Graphically, Thor excelled, but as a gamer would know best, there's little use of eye-candy without the substance it composes. Expand
  75. May 18, 2011
    Very enjoyable summer movie, reminiscent to Iron Man I, with quality acting, decent writing (for a summer movie), good special effects, and a few laugh out-loud moments. It moves along well, through several interesting settings. The 3D IMAX provides added punch with some quality special effects. A great escapist matinee.
  76. Jun 16, 2011
    Surprisingly good. I thought it was even better than X-men first class. I think what got me the most was the great mix of action and humor which reminded me of the first Iron man.
  77. May 11, 2011
    NOT GOING> SICK OF THE STUPID 3D GLASSES. NOTHING BUT A GIMMICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ALMOST EVERY 3D MOVIE I HAVE BEEN TO WOULD BE JUST AS GOOD IN 2D. ESPECIALLY WHEN SHOT WITH HIGH QUALITY FILM. GIMMICK TO SCRATCH MORE SCRATCH OUT OF YOUR POCKET. Expand
  78. May 18, 2011
    Though the final battle is a little anti-climactic, Thor does a great job of transitioning between Asgaard and Earth and the interconnectivity of the two. There was not a single time I can think of that the movie was boring or that I wished a scene would move on so we could get to the good stuff. A solid, thoroughly entertaining first effort for Thor and with a little more time spent on strengthening the chemistry between Thor and Jane I think Thor's next outing will solidify him as one of the premier superhero movie franchises. The 3D was not overdone or used just for the sake of using it. The art style for Asgaard was a sight to be hold, total eye candy. I would have liked a little more backstory explaining the backstory between the Asgaardians and the Frost Giants but other than the less than thrilling ending, that was the only other negative I can report. Chris Hemsworth was born for the role and Kat Dennings provides some good comic relief, I'd like to see her have a larger role in the next one. I went in with low expectations and came out thoroughly entertained. Highly recommend, especially if you can see it in IMAX. Two thumbs up! Expand
  79. Nov 15, 2011
    Thor's showing was mediocre at best. CGI was not up to date and action scenes contained nothing spectacular. It felt like the movie's focus was more on the character relationships rather than the action; which was what I was looking forward to.
  80. May 11, 2011
    I think the film was fantastic. So many of these hero flicks are pure origin first time around and I thought with THOR, not being one of the most well known character, would be a major origin story. They blazed through that part and got it out of the way though. From there it was a cool story, cool plot, not insanely original, great fx, great action. I'm not overly critical of movies, I want to enjoy them, plain and simple, and this movie I did. It's a good time. Worth the price of the ticket. Expand
  81. Sep 16, 2011
    I don't know how. Thor was goddamn awful and silly. Probably with the script and characters. But Hiddleston was great. I should worry with The Avengers now.
  82. May 25, 2011
    Thor, How would I review Thor.......Let's just say I'm suprised that Natalie Portman didn't Scream to the Heavens when Thor dies! God of Thunder?, More Like God of Cheesy! The Purpose of anyone making a movie is to make the audience believe that what they see before their eyes could possibly be true, to make the preposterous possible......Like in the First Iron Man, That movie made me believe that a man could make an Iron suit and hurl himself into the air at phenomenal speeds.....They had it, I believed..But Thor.....(Let me just say before I go on that the actor who played Thor was excellent! However, everything that was around him was not!)........Natalie Portman is Gorgeous, I love her, however, I could not stand her in this film, she is a wonderful actress, But such a cheesy role should not be her style......(+ Star Wars). The fact that Thor has a love interest in this film at all makes it weak.....And the scene where Thor's Band of Friends came to Earth to find him, was reminiscent of a Bad movie experience I had as a child, when I spent my hard earned money to see a film called "Masters of the Universe" As his friends were walking through the town streets, I'm thinking....."What happened? Did I make a mistake and purchase a ticket for the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers movie!? I'm sorry but this movie did not make me believe.....The only time I did believe is when Anthony Hopkins as Odin appeared on screen and narrated. I liked the Asgard scenes Which is why I gave the movie a five, but when the movie moves its plot to the earth it was a total disaster.......... Kat Dennings....What the hell was her purpose?!? Hollywood needs to develop some money management skills!!!!! Expand
  83. May 8, 2011
    This film is what happens when you take Norse Mythology and mess it up into an incomprehensible mess. The only good thing are the special effects. But that's to be expected with our current technology.
  84. May 6, 2011
    Even though I was expecting something worth watching due to the cast, Thor exceeded my expectations. Beautifully shot realms of gods, mind blowing action scenes, good amount of humor and easy going Iron Man like plot left satisfactory feeling. I would give it 7.5 due to poor character development, but the system only allow 7 or 8.
  85. Nov 12, 2011
    By far the worst Marvel movie I have ever seen in my life... it was cheesy corny and im so glad i saw it for free because i wouldnt pay a dime to see it again... if you actually enjoyed this movie and is looking forward to thor 2 need to recheck yourself.
  86. Feb 7, 2012
    Thor is a very uneven movie. Some parts are very entertaining, such as the initial fight between Thor and his companions and the frost giants. However, the entire middle of the film which takes place mostly on Earth is very uneventful and they don't really fill it with any meaningful character development. Chris Hemsworth is fine as Thor, but the best performance and most interesting character is definitely Tom Hiddleston who plays Loki. The attempts at humor in the movie are forced and rarely funny. The first 30 minutes and the last 30 minutes are fairly entertaining, but there's a lot of dead zones in the script. Expand
  87. May 6, 2011
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. i didn't like it


    i didn't understand how thor could become humble so quickly. he was basically arrogant until he finds that he cant use his hammer. then he meets his friends. then he 'sacrifices' himself to save the town. then he gets his hammer back. then he goes to fight his brother. i dont get what the other characters are for (apart from the king and brother). the friends are **** compared to thor. i dont see what natalie portman does in the entire movie. the only thing the natalie portman's dad's friend does is tell natalie portman to not help thor. the only thing the other woman does is provide a bit of humour. loki's frost giant heritage doesn't even factor into thor's decisions. i don't understand why odin goes to sleep when he's stressed. wth is odinsleep?

    only good thing i liked was the graphics. Asgard was very nice. perhaps if i read the comics i would understand better. but that just makes the movie inaccessible to the greater public.
  88. Feb 10, 2012
    Thor is definitely one of the weaker movies based on Marvel superheroes. The plot is decent but the problem is that it isn't told very well, creating a situation where dramatic moments often fall flat. The intense special effects used to create Asgard can sometimes be overwhelming although other effects are quite good. Some characters are likeable but not lovable due to the fact that they are mostly one-dimensional. We don't even get a good insight into Thor himself and yet we are encouraged to root for him. Any character development that does happen appears to happen in stages instead of being a natural progression. The central romance feels forced although both actors try hard to make it work. The movie is fun, however, if you adjust your expectations. Certain fight scenes are exciting and the writing can sometimes be funny. Thor is not essential viewing and will not change your life but you might enjoy yourself. Expand
  89. May 15, 2011
    The reason I loved Thor was because it performed well on a few fronts. The Special Effects are the best to date. Thor is portrayed very closely to his comic character, in terms of Powers, attitude,etc. The arc of th story was well laid out and the pacing was balanced. It was a brilliant way to bring a really fantastic un-real world of Marvel Comics
  90. May 8, 2011
    Solid story, solid acting, great special effects. The movie is very faithful to the source material (which will please comic geeks), but is approachable enough that casual audiences can enjoy it as well. I'd avoid seeing it in 3D. The film wasn't shot with 3D in mind so it really doesn't add anything to the experience and really may take away slightly from optimal viewing because it makes CG effects harder to follow. Overall I'd say its as good as the first Iron Man, but lacks an actor with the presence that Robert Downey, Jr brings to the screen. Expand
  91. May 21, 2011
    This movie was pretty enjoyable to watch. I'm a big Marvel fan so I came into this movie expecting quite a lot. It delivered for the most part. I liked the character of Thor and some of the scenes (especially at the beginning) are pretty fun to watch. If you're a fan of Marvel and the Marvel movies. If your not really into the comic book or superhero stuff, you should probably give it a miss.
  92. Jul 8, 2014
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Metacritic really should have a way to delete reviews​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​. Expand
  93. May 6, 2011
    Good popcorn flick with lots of action. Definitely worth seeing in the theater but not in 3d. The film was not shot in real 3d so the 3d effect is poor and strains your eyes.
  94. May 7, 2011
    A bit disappointing. I'm a big comic book fan, and I did enjoy the comic book aspects of the film, but the movie aspects didn't really meet my standards. To me I thought the movie just kinda happened, there wasn't much to it, it just played and that was it. The action was fantastic, but the story was weak. The best part was the Avengers references, and Stan Lee's cameo.
  95. Jun 3, 2011
    Pathetic movie. People rating this movie extremely high had to be drunk when seeing this film. First off the movie was no better than your typical Tv Sci Fi flick. The humor was uninspired as were the action sequences which all only lasted rougly 1-2 minutes. For Thor claiming himself to be "THE MIGHTY THOR" all throughout the film gee not much might was demonstrated. His great generic comeback sequence was over before it even began. Expand
  96. May 6, 2011
    I really loved this movie. All the humor was great and I never seen this many people laugh at some of these jokes. Granted that it had a few hiccups here and there which did not get the 10 but enough that its worth going at the middle of the night just to watch a movie. Stan Lee cameo was great and loved the character progression. I would recommend anyone to watch it.
  97. May 16, 2011
    I greatly enjoyed this movie,it has to be said.Before watching,i wasnt sure i would when i heard that most of it is set in Asgard,but i liked the whole Asgard setting & events.Though Asgard seemed quite lifeless.The Warriors 3 were somewhat underused,& mainly serve as a distraction for the Destroyer later on,& i dont see how Thor could 'change his ways' in such a short space of time on Earth,especially as nothing particually profound happend to him,but they had to fit it all into a movie i guess.. Also,seemed a waste just having the earth moments set in some small town in the desert(hardly a place to match the events surrounding Gods).. but as i said at the beginning,i enjoyed this movie at the end of the day.When there was action,it was good,& suprisingly enjoyed the rivalries & politics of the Gods in Asgard.Thor,Loki & Odin were all played really well i thought.Would like to see Thor wear his helmet more in his future appearences though,so he'd look more Thor/Godlike & true to the comic,instead of the Token taking it off in this movie though. Collapse
  98. Apr 22, 2012
    Unfortunately I had high expectations for this movie and I was sorely disappointed. There was so much more scope for battle scene which and along with his band of merry friends I struggled to understand why Thor and co. were build up to be this crack squad of warriors when they done so little battling.
  99. Oct 12, 2011
    Honestly, ZERO is too high for this movie. Big shame artists like Portman and Hopkins take roles in such movies for money. Wasted two hours of my life watching it because of surprisingly high ratings of other people :-(
  100. May 23, 2011
    Thor is just merely too short and lacks the depth action films potentially have. But overall, it is a visually dazzling summer blockbuster packed with clever writing and excellent performances.

Mixed or average reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 22 out of 40
  2. Negative: 4 out of 40
  1. Reviewed by: Roger Ebert
    Jul 29, 2011
    The standards for comic book superhero movies have been established by "Superman," "The Dark Knight," "Spider-Man 2" and "Iron Man." In that company "Thor" is pitiful. Consider even the comparable villains (Lex Luthor, the Joker, Doc Ock and Obadiah Stane). Memories of all four come instantly to mind. Will you be thinking of Loki six minutes after this movie is over?
  2. Reviewed by: Anthony Lane
    May 12, 2011
    The year's most divided movie to date; everything that happens in the higher realms, vaguely derived from Nordic legend, is posturing nonsense, whereas the scenes down here are managed, for the most part, with dexterity and wit. [16 May 2011, p. 133]
  3. Reviewed by: J.R. Jones
    May 11, 2011
    This is eminently missable, though the mosaic design of Asgard, Thor's mythical realm, is pretty cool.