jonasgr

Ragnarok explores the relation between Thor and Loki and Hulk, and introduces memorable characters like Grandmaster, Valkyrie and Hela. What does Love & Thunder add in these categories? Almost nothing!

Using Guns n' Roses songs was enjoyable and follows the same path as Immigrant Song in Ragnarok... so cool but nothing new.

I assume MCU fans enjoy when stand-alone movies adds something to the overall story? Ragnarok adds quite a bit, Love & Thunder adds (almost) nothing.

Christian Bale was really good as Gorr, but the introduction felt really silly and the end as well. The effects associated with Gorr reminded me of the effects in the 1990 movie Ghost.

The silly parts in the movie are good, but I lack any depth for this to balance with.

I fail to find one single believable character or scene for that matter. Good actors portraying characters without any depth makes this one of the worst movies I've witnessed in many years.

I had high hopes but none were met. The CGI team put all their energy on large machinery. The photo team demanded way to many slow-motion scenes. The editing team focused on the takes were the actors didn't speak. The music team focused one one(?) single crescendo bass line. The writers (or editors) gave us a storyline which could have been told in ten minutes.

So what did we get? We got a movie shot in dark plain surroundings, good actors with no room to act and no reasonable dialogue to master. Add a lot of illogical flying machinery maneuvering in slow-motion to make them look bigger, or the most stupid substitute to a helicopter I've ever seen; and a plot that almost never make sense. Picture all this in a movie where the soundtrack consist of eight beats constantly repeating in an endless chase of emphasizing a crescendo that never came.