Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Formosa wrote:
Yep he did but I think if it's spoilered it's ok, not sure, an explanation would be nice though

Isn't it that you can embed non gaming images but not upload them to the site since uploading adds them to the gallery system which is supposed to be wargaming only?

Backfire wrote:
Multiverse, hmm...is this going to be an adaptation of the God-Butcher story? Though that was same Thor all along, just different ages.

In general sense, I really don't like completely different characters adopting 'Thor' name just like that. Asgard might have someone else as God of Thunder (like Beta-Bill or Storm was), but Thor is Thor.

My knee-jerk reaction about the Eternals is that I don't care about it at all. I thought Gaiman's Eternal series was quite boring.

Of the Thor runs that I've read, which I'm sure is a miniscule number compared to some of the more invested MCU fans, the god butcher story is possibly my favorite. It really sets the stage for Lady Thor as well, so I'm holding out a slim hope that it's what they do. It really plays on Thor's responsibilities as a god which the MCU so far has not touched at all, so I'll acknowledge that it's a very, very remote possibility.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Isn't he now (not) the leader of the (As)Guardians of the Galaxy (This was great fun)

No-one knows anything about the plot of GotG3, so mebbe aye, mebbe naw. It's as likely that they leave Thor in a bar in the opening scene.

Lady Thor hummm...Perhaps they should use a body builder type instead of one that is 105 lbs of pure bone. That would probably hurt viewership though because tiny girls are prettier. In the end it's all about the money isn't it.

 Overread wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Yep he did but I think if it's spoilered it's ok, not sure, an explanation would be nice though

Isn't it that you can embed non gaming images but not upload them to the site since uploading adds them to the gallery system which is supposed to be wargaming only?

 Xenomancers wrote:
Lady Thor hummm...Perhaps they should use a body builder type instead of one that is 105 lbs of pure bone. That would probably hurt viewership though because tiny girls are prettier. In the end it's all about the money isn't it.

They have Valkrie and too a lesser degree Sir for the that - we don't know what she appears like when she becomes Thor....

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Lady Thor hummm...Perhaps they should use a body builder type instead of one that is 105 lbs of pure bone. That would probably hurt viewership though because tiny girls are prettier. In the end it's all about the money isn't it.

They have Valkrie and too a lesser degree Sir for the that - we don't know what she appears like when she becomes Thor....

I'm thinking more like Brienne of Tarth from GOT. That is not existing. Valkyrie is 5'4" and also tiny.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Lady Thor hummm...Perhaps they should use a body builder type instead of one that is 105 lbs of pure bone. That would probably hurt viewership though because tiny girls are prettier. In the end it's all about the money isn't it.

They have Valkrie and too a lesser degree Sir for the that - we don't know what she appears like when she becomes Thor....

I'm thinking more like Brienne of Tarth from GOT. That is not existing. Valkyrie is 5'4" and also tiny.

For me Valkyrie has a good "physical presence" on screen, same as Black Widow and the chief bodyguard of Black Panther.

I do recall these arguments when the Wonder Woman actress was revealed and they were wrong then Aliens and Gods don't have to obey the rules, now how and why Jane is able to tap into the power will be part fo this question. IS she a mortal infused with godly power - does she look very different when is Thor - Banner/Hulk style?

They’re also Asgardian, and thus far, far stronger than humans. So build and stature basically means nowt.

Though as for Wonder Woman? It’s still my opinion that Gal Gadot is a terrible and incredibly wooden actress.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
They’re also Asgardian, and thus far, far stronger than humans. So build and stature basically means nowt..

Agreed - hence my interest in Jane's powers, although one of the weakerr parts of the last Thor film was how all "normal" Asgardians became weak and helpless.

Not All Asgardians can throw lightning around - only some are actual "Gods" I think - not sure how it works, how you get to have the powers - is it birth, confered upon you etc?

While I generally enjoyed the arc from Iron Man to Endgame (with FFH prologue) at this point feeling burnt out on the Marvel films and am having trouble rustling up interest in the new wave.

Lady Thor is one of the greater reinventions out of the Generations bunch. Definitely a story I'm happy to see get the big screen treatment.

I'm way more interested in the What If... announcement then Jane Foster Thor, because I haven't read any of the Jane Foster Thor comics yet. I guess I have like two years though. I've heard they're pretty good.

really surprised to see Natalie Portman come back though. I was sure she was gone for good.

 Ouze wrote:
I'm way more interested in the What If... announcement then Jane Foster Thor, because I haven't read any of the Jane Foster Thor comics yet. I guess I have like two years though. I've heard they're pretty good.

really surprised to see Natalie Portman come back though. I was sure she was gone for good.

I am all in on this idea of Lady Thor. I think it could be a pretty fantastic movie given the people involved. My only hang up is.... where has her character been this whole time? When did we even last see her? It should be like, a decade at least in the movie timeline?

Edit: Does this also mean Kat Dennings is coming back?

 Ouze wrote:

really surprised to see Natalie Portman come back though. I was sure she was gone for good.

How has her career been in the last few years? I honestly don't know. Because wasn't one of the major reasons she signed on in the first place because her career wasn't doing so well, and then she wanted out when her career was going well again?

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

really surprised to see Natalie Portman come back though. I was sure she was gone for good.

How has her career been in the last few years? I honestly don't know. Because wasn't one of the major reasons she signed on in the first place because her career wasn't doing so well, and then she wanted out when her career was going well again?

That was a lot of the speculation, yeah.

But it isn't exactly like she needs to be doing things she wasn't happy with.

In her defense, I would also be skeptical of getting on board a big franchise if I was her. Probably didn't want another prequel thing happening.....

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

really surprised to see Natalie Portman come back though. I was sure she was gone for good.

How has her career been in the last few years? I honestly don't know. Because wasn't one of the major reasons she signed on in the first place because her career wasn't doing so well, and then she wanted out when her career was going well again?

That was a lot of the speculation, yeah.

But it isn't exactly like she needs to be doing things she wasn't happy with.

Maybe she left the MCU because she wasn't interested in playing the Damsel In Distress number 155 545, but is ready to come back to it in a role that is a bit more fun and involved. It's tought to keep top billing actresses still in their prime doing weak secondary cast jobs which mostly revolved into being a glorified prop and plot device.

I'm not a huge comic book fan and I must admit that the design for feminine Thor was way better then its regular masculine version. The former looked like a fairly cool superheroin while the later looked like an idiot out of a cheap community theatre play, but maybe that's just me. It's true though that she's a bit short for a classic superhero, but size never stopped Tom Cruise to play action heroes. At least, she's of average size compared to other American women unlike Cruise who is bellow the male average for size in the US. A few camera tricks and a good trainer and costume and she can look like a proper action hero.

Frankly, Foster Thor might be one of the better things to come out of the comics side of things lately.

Jason Aaron's run on "War of the Realms" was frigging great and he was part of the team that brought Foster Thor into being.

Also she has a wonderful "Oh Hel Yes!" pun at one point.

epronovost wrote:
It's true though that she's a bit short for a classic superhero, but size never stopped Tom Cruise to play action heroes. At least, she's of average size compared to other American women unlike Cruise who is bellow the male average for size in the US. A few camera tricks and a good trainer and costume and she can look like a proper action hero.

Yeah, I thought about that as well, but I bet it doesn't really matter. She's about the same height as Tessa Thompson, and Valkyrie worked fine. She's got a pretty slight frame but her power comes from literal magic, not her biceps, so whatever.

I guess I was mostly surprised she came back because I would consider her a fairly serious actress* and it seemed like maybe she thought comic book movies were beneath her, but maybe she thought just being Thor's long-term girlfriend was. I think epronovost is probably right. Maybe she thought she'd be tied up with Annihilation sequels that now seem unlikely to happen.

*Your Highness aside

Marvel/DC has been steadily getting less and less of my hard earned ££…Last thing I saw was end game which was surprisingly well executed (apart from two scenes that were very cringeworthy shoehorn). I went to see it more out of OCD than any expectation but was very happy.

To be honest what we really need is like 5-10 years of no superhero films. Of course that will never happen as its a money making machine so I'm not kidding myself there.

I would really like to see the sequel to Venom before anything else as well some some obscure heroes/anti heroes coming out from the shadows.

What I don't really want to see is yet another origin story for a new spiderman/iron man/ thor etc. So im not sure how I feel about another thor film about fem-thor/Portman-thor.
Can take it or leave it really.

We are not sure that the plot will be about portman taking over.

The movie right before thor 4 is Dr Strange and the Multiverse. It very well may be a Thor of another universe when we see Lady Thor. No sense getting upset about what might be before we have seen a single frame.

 Argive wrote:
To be honest what we really need is like 5-10 years of no superhero films.

'We' don't need any such thing. I'm more than happy for them to keep churning them out. If you're getting over it, you could just, you know, not watch them for 5-10 years...


And yeah, given that Hemsworth is still in this next movie as well, I would put my guess on Natalie-Thor being a multiverse crossover thing.

epronovost wrote:

Maybe she left the MCU because she wasn't interested in playing the Damsel In Distress number 155 545, but is ready to come back to it in a role that is a bit more fun and involved. It's tought to keep top billing actresses still in their prime doing weak secondary cast jobs which mostly revolved into being a glorified prop and plot device.

A lot of serious actors signed on to the MCU in the wake of The Dark Knight hoping to get a chance to pull off something similar to Ledger only to find themselves stuck in pretty stock character roles while the movies were mostly about establishing the heroes. Portman very much seems the type to reject the character she was stuck playing, particularly in Thor 2 but also the type to be lured back by a potential lead role.

 insaniak wrote:

 Argive wrote:
To be honest what we really need is like 5-10 years of no superhero films.

'We' don't need any such thing. I'm more than happy for them to keep churning them out. If you're getting over it, you could just, you know, not watch them for 5-10 years...


And yeah, given that Hemsworth is still in this next movie as well, I would put my guess on Natalie-Thor being a multiverse crossover thing.

I like good superhero films, its a great time to be alive and they are delivering things I've wanted to watch as a kid.

I was going towards the 'quality over quanity' train of though. Personally think there's a bit of an over saturation of samesy hero flicks. I have a nagging feeling that as the older audience chips out due to slipping quality, they will cater more and more to younger viewers and the bar will be set lower with each film.

I would definitely like to see more very good superhero films.

Spiderman far from home was very not samey and great. Infinity war was also great and something we have never seen before. End game was good and also something we have never seen before.

There has been no slipping quality from marvel. If anything they have improved since kevin F took control away from ike pearlmutter.

 Argive wrote:
To be honest what we really need is like 5-10 years of no superhero films.

Why, exactly?

Notice how people never say wee need yeatrs w/o comedies, action flicks or horror?
only super heroe films

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Argive wrote:
To be honest what we really need is like 5-10 years of no superhero films.

Why, exactly?

Am currently in year two of no superhero films. Standing back made me appreciate the original comics more.

She-Thor doesn't do it for me. While I'm sure the movie will do a billion in worldwide sales, it just makes me miss Thor.

While Lady Thor was about Odinson was going through some of the most interesting stories he has had in the last few decades as well. The one does not exclude the other.