How Was ‘Thor: The Dark World’? [REVIEW]

We first came to know Thor back in 2011.  After being marooned on Earth and battling to protect what he has come to value, he returned to Asgard a changed man.  'Thor: The Dark World' is the sequel to the first Thor movie and occurs after 'The Avengers'.

Score: 7/10

An ancient enemy returns and Asgard is in jeopardy.  The Asgardian forces and Odin himself cannot stand against this old enemy.  Thor reunites with Jane foster and gambles with his life to save the 9 realms.  As with all of my reviews, I will do my best to avoid any spoilers.

How It Looked

A large part of the movie took place on Asgard.  There were some amazing shots.  However, I feel that they could have added more depth to the movie with some more panoramic shots of Asgard itself.  Most of the scenes in Asgard took place indoors. I already know what Earth looks like so those shots while nice looking were ho-hum in my opinion.

It would have been nice to see more of the 9 different realms rather than Asgard, the dark world, and Earth.

The special effects were top-notch.

The large scale battles including Thor's companions were wonderful albeit too short.  If you've seen the original 'Thor' and 'The Avengers' there is nothing really new to Thor's fighting.

Story

Unfortunately, it was rather predictable.  The storyline was relatively unimaginative.  If you did not understand the key part of the convergence, get ready because they will repeat it 4 other times.  The villain had very little development and was altogether a weak antagonist.  There were several points in the plot that didn't quite make sense.  There was a hinting at a love triangle but once again it was not developed and pursued in the movie.  It may have been better as a Thor movie to show Thor fighting to bring peace to the 9 realms.

Acting

Tom Hiddleston who played Loki was magnificent.  Despite the poor writing he brought his character to life as the charming, intelligent, conniving, and handsome demi-god. In fact he portrays Loki so well it makes me wonder if the Thor franchise would have been better if they had originally cast Tom Hiddleston as Thor, the part he originally screen tested for.  I have to say I was rather bored with Chris Hemsworth's portrayal as Thor and often wished that Loki would be back on-screen.

Anthony Hopkins did a great job as Odin with his commanding presence, yet the writing did not allow him much time on screen.  The same can be said of Rene Russo as Fridda, who was surprisingly kick-ass in the short time she was on-screen.

Christopher Eccleston I know to be a wonderful actor from his days as the The Doctor from 'Doctor Who'.  Unfortunately again,  the writing took away from what I think could have been a fine performance.

Conclusion

NEED. MORE. LOKI.  Seriously, I may sound like a fan boy, but after Hiddleston's portrayal as Loki in both 'The Avengers' and the first 'Thor' I think he has added even more depth to his character through his acting in this movie.  I think there may even need to be a spinoff Loki movie.  I was enamored with the action scenes on the big screen despite them being too short.  It was a 'Good' superhero movie, but sadly it was not 'Great'.   I would say it was definitely worth seeing in the theater despite the predictable writing.  And, as with every Marvel movie, there was a teaser at the end of the credits setting it up for another movie.