Thor In Review *SPOILERS*

      So I saw Thor about a week ago and I was pleasantly surprised at how good it was. I by no means thought it was going to be a train wreck, however I thought the idea of Thor of the Marvel variety wouldn't translate as well to an audience as say the previous two Iron Man's did. Suffice to say I was mistaken. It's appeal seemed to lie somewhere between Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk. It had the action, writing, and directing of the Iron Man films and had the sort of simplicity that The Incredible Hulk did in that it didn't get completely bogged down in origin set up. If Iron Man was a large Birthday Cake and The Incredible Hulk a cookie than that would place Thor somewhere in the realm of being a cupcake. Yes I just used a baking metaphor to compare 3 Comic book movies. What of it?

        There were a few decisions the filmmakers made that I didn't quite understand. Now I don't pretend to be an expert of the canon on Marvel Comic's Thor but I do have a fair rudimentary knowledge of his setup. One thing I did not get was they chose to make Loki (Thor's brother/half brother in some circles) and abandoned Frost Giant baby. I know it was supposed to be a way to further push Loki in becoming truly evil, essentially distancing him from his family even further. But why a Frost Giant? In the film version the Frost Giants in this imagining aren't entirely GIANT as the word would suggest. They're maybe 10 to 15 feet tall. Granted that's not tiny but when I think Giant I think of something several stories tall. Anyhow Loki is about the size of a normal human/Asguardian. "Oh. Well he was the runt of his litter." Oh well how did they make his skin not navy blue? "Um....cuz Odin just loved him damn so much....." Way to cut corners. Although I don't quite get how that mechanic works it certainly yielded some believable results. Loki's final decision in the film hinged on him feeling like he was never really a son to Odin. And you could see the pain in his eyes and the resoluteness in his face.

They never really explained what the Odin Sleep is for that matter either. Now I don't know too much about it but the character of Odin in some iterations must go into a deep sleep in order to...well I guess it varies. Sometimes it's to ensure he stays immortal. Sometimes it somehow ensures that Asguard will be protected....because that's how that works I guess. Anyhow, it's never really explained why in the film version he goes into this mystical sleep. More or less it's just for plot convenience.

Overall it was a well executed film. Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, and Tom Hiddleston all did great jobs.  I'll definitely be buying this on DVD when it comes out.

-Marchy

PS-Oh and the teaser at the and of the credits. Loki's still alive (shocker) and he's manipulating Natalie's protective father figure....big woop.

Comic Movies: The Road to The Avengers

I am fortunate enough to have grown up with the advent of Comic Books being made into feature films. This summer is the road leading up to quite possibly the most anticipated comic book movie of all time: The Avengers. (No the Justice League movie will never be made, deal with it). I'm here to make a simple prediction about the big 3 comic book movies of the summer (I'm leaving out X-Men: First class, I'll get to that in a later post) Short and to the point here's how it'll probably go.



       Thor           <            Green Lantern      <       Cap. America

• Thor and Green Lantern are secondary character to the general movie-going public. One could argue Captain America has fallen to their level of popularity as well over the many many years since his first appearance on paper. However, he still has ten times the name recognition than Green Lantern and Thor do, and Thor was part of a civilization's mythology so that's saying something. Plus it has only been a few years since the events of Captain America's death in Marvel Canon which further boosted Cap's popularity because news stations got ahold of the news and made a huge stink out of it. (Side note: it'll be interesting when mainstream media gets wind of Superman revoking his U.S. Citizenship in DC Canon currently)

• So that's why Cap's in my number one slot. Why is GL in number two? Well name recognition again, but this time more for the actor than the character. Women love Ryan Reynolds, and a lot of dudes think he's hilarious as well. Both Thor and GL have budgets of roughly $150 million. It seems GL has out most of that into CGI work. I'm not the biggest fan of CGI, but it can do some cool stuff. However GL's looking to have almost as much eye candy as Avatar or Revenge of The Sith. Movie goers eat that up nowadays.

• Thor. I really hope this one is the little engine that could. I feel the team behind it had a lot of love for the mythos and are trying to integrate Thor carefully into the Avengers film world. There's not much I can offer on this one past my own opinion. Keep in mind this is how I figure how these will do FINANCIALLY. I quite honestly have no idea which will actually BE the better film. I'll let you know at the end of June.

-Marchy

Who am I?

Hey. I recently had to write a brief essay for my intro to philosophy class simply asking: what is my "self?"
this just kinda came out in a stream of consciousness. It's nothing too remarkable, just kinda felt like posting it. Enjoy.

Who am I?

This question reminds me of a scene in a particular movie called Anger Management. A person joins an anger management group, and in their first therapy session the therapist asks the patient to tell the rest of the group who he is. He tells them his name. The doctor points out that is simple his name, they want to know who he is. The patient goes on listing hobbies, interests, and the schools he attended. All are met with the notion those are just material things, they want to know who he is. Eventually he loses his composure, and yells at the Therapist and group. This was all done for comedic purpose, but it really does pose an interesting question. Who am I? Am I my job, school, talents, and hobbies? Who am I, really?

            The question of “who am I?” evolved over time to “what is my ‘self?” When looked up in the dictionary it says it “is the essential being that distinguishes oneself from others.” But what is that being? Is it a physical object that rests somewhere inside out bodies, or is it a simple notion of rationale within out minds? For myself it is a mental idea that denotes what my “self” is to me. But what if I were to befall a tragic accident that cost me my memories? All the events, experiences, every action that I made and was made toward me that created what I believe to be my “self” would be gone in an instant. What would I be then? Would I even have a “self” anymore? Would I have to make a new “self?” It would be like wiping a computers memory clean and filling it with new programs and information. The frame would remain relatively the same, but it would have entirely new ways of operating. So by that logic, could my “self” truly be a physical object within my body? If my memories can be wiped from me am I nothing more than a bipedal, breathing, eating, and learning laptop?

            I try not to struggle with this notion too much, for if I did I feel I would miss all the glorious things life has to offer. How can one enjoy their “self” if all they do is obsess over its relevancy, and even its existence? The simple answer is not easily. There are great philosophers who ate, breathed, and slept with this notion on their brains at all times. That was enough for them, getting up in the morning and trying to tackle this notion is what gave them pleasure in life. I however, am I much simpler creature. These notions get very heady, and tedious to me if I am exposed to them for too long. To put it bluntly, I would get up, run, and tackle life to the ground than sit and ponder if my “self” can truly enjoy it.