How Thor: Ragnarok is 97%+ on RT is beyond me... *Big Spoilers*

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Movies: At the Theater
  3. How Thor: Ragnarok is 97%+ on RT is beyond me... *Big Spoilers*

User Info: TruthAndJustice

5 months ago#1
I'm gonna say it, the film was pretty mediocre. This isn't a contrarian opinion (like calling Shawshank bad) I think it's a pretty damn reasonable statement. The film did absolutely nothing to add anything to its genre. Now that's fine if it's just a standard story that's been executed exceptionally well, but it wasn't.

Essentially, Thor: Ragnarok is about Thor and Loki landing on a planet that you'd be forgiven for thinking was part of the Star Wars universe, whilst their sister decimates Asguard. Also Hulk is on this planet too, the odds of that happening is so ridiculously low that you'd make a mockery out of the word 'coincidence' for using it. Plot A is about Thor and gang escaping the planet, Plot B is about Sister death b**** vandalising Asguard and a very minor Plot C is about Stringer Bell gathering the people of Asguard off to safety.

Plot A is basically filler and that's the entire movie. We briefly move to Plot B from time to time and it's a borefest of sister death taking out some cannon fodder with a motivation that's almost abhorrently unoriginal i.e. another s***ty villain from Disney/Marvel. Plot C is pointless.

The film pretends to have character arcs but they're all pretty much bulls***. Valkeryie woman is ashamed of losing that war thing in the past, then from being a stubborn drunk she suddenly says "okay" and joins the crew. Loki is Loki, he pointlessly tries to betray Thor at the end of the 2nd act, which was weird because half way through the film he clearly wants to leave the planet (and that wasn't an act because his motivations arose without Thor being around). Hulk is a tag along. Thor learns nothing new apart from the fact that his power doesn't come from his hammer. That's it.

Even the comedy is formulaic. The entire comedy of the movie boils down to one formula, X has a short, slightly emotional monologue, which is then instantly undermined by a "comedic" event that occurs straight after. There's a couple of absurdity jokes thrown in, they were pretty good, but other than that, predictable comedy.

The action scenes were rubbish, Thor vs Hulk was boring. Death b**** was more of a borefest, it's just her throwing spears for the millionth time and killing nobodies. Hulk vs Fire demon was something I was most interested in from the trailers but that was a bait and switch because 90% of the fight was in the trailer (yes the fight is approx 6 seconds long).

Thor: Ragnarok is really not worthy of such a high RT score. For the record, I don't actually like Marvel films that much, or superhero films in general, but as a fan of film I'll watch anything. I did like the first Avengers though and thought Winter America was pretty good but not that good (basically a rip-off of paranoia films of the 70s). The rest I mostly think are terrible. Thor: Ragnarok isn't terrible, though.

User Info: Mastodan

5 months ago#2
It's metacritic score gives a much better idea.

Like people saying it's the best thing Marvel have done... Come on now.

User Info: nclrwntr

5 months ago#3
The RT just means critics liked it. If the critic barely gives it a recommendation, it still counts as a fresh score. It currently has a 7.7/10 rating on RT and a 72 on Metacritic. It'll likely drop a little more once another 200 reviews are added.

User Info: y3kman

5 months ago#4
You typed all that without even understanding what the RT aggregate score is?
Triggerfish! Triggerfish! Pull that trigger, fish!

User Info: TruthAndJustice

5 months ago#5
I understand it and I still don't think it deserves that many fresh ratings when we look at things relatively. It did nothing for its genre, most of the plot was actually just an elongated filler episode and the villain was neither original nor was she interesting.

It's not the best thing Marvel has done either, Avengers Assemble and Winter Soldier are better, as is the first Guardians of the Galaxy.

User Info: lowlifeboy

5 months ago#6
i feel the same about dunkirk and mad max being high on RT. i don’t like them but if majority of critics likes it, kudos to them. point is, don’t use RT to judge a film.

User Info: rockus

5 months ago#7
It's not the best thing Marvel has done either, Avengers Assemble and Winter Soldier are better, as is the first Guardians of the Galaxy.

It doesn't have to be. It just has to have critics like it, even just moderately to receive a high percentage.

Stop taking review scores so seriously, especially the tomato percentage.

And if you want to know how it got that score, then read the reviews. They should be able to tell you why, it's what they're for. They're the thing that's important, not some aggregate score or a percentage of who liked it.

User Info: The Deadpool

The Deadpool
5 months ago#8
Welcome to the 3% buddy.
We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons.
tripledoublehelix 5 months ago#9
look closely and you'll see that there are only a few top critics so far, with those reviews showing 80%, which is probably more accurate.
The perfect job for your skill set is King of Spain.

User Info: End2011

5 months ago#10
The butthurt is amazing
  1. Boards
  2. Movies: At the Theater
  3. How Thor: Ragnarok is 97%+ on RT is beyond me... *Big Spoilers*

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived