I saw the movie last week and what struck me is they could have easily had a much more complex, subtle conflict than GOOD VS. EVIL! LIGHT AGAINST DARKNESS!
As hinted at in the film, the existence or presence of Light was an extinction-level threat to the Drow Night Elves who had existed in Darkness long before the light came around. Destroying the universe was a matter of “survival” for the elves, although how specifically Light is harmful is not explained. So the overarching conflict would have been between two kings almost identical in their aims: destruction of another race in order to save their own. This opens up so many more interesting and advanced character development and plotlines that would have made for a more enjoyable and thought provoking movie.
PS. Unless they hid things about Loki’s powers, the “twist” ending is complete bull. There’s just no way it works.
Rabidtreeweaselsays
Unfortunately it assumes you are familiar with Nordic mythology and skips the oppurtunity to delve into why Svartelves need to live in darkness or what the aether is. It is definitely a movie with a narrow appeal that was marketed to a wide audience. I loved it but I can see how, in terms of telling an accessible story, it failed. If the villains motivations require an explanation from fans of the books then the writers haven’t translated the story well. I had the same problem with the Krull invasion in Avengers. Why, aside from We Like Shooting Stuff, do they want to attack Earth? Why does Hulk leave halfway through and come back totall in control?
Artorsays
I don’t like Marvel’s Thor at all. The mythological Thor is an awesomely interesting character, with a ton of ancient lore surrounding him. Marvel could have mined that literature heavily and made a truly epic hero, but instead made this cartoon caricature that barely resembles his namesake. If they wanted just another dumb superhero, they should have gone with that. Instead, they used the name of a great figure from mythology, and ignored most of the mythology.
I saw the movie last week and what struck me is they could have easily had a much more complex, subtle conflict than GOOD VS. EVIL! LIGHT AGAINST DARKNESS!
As hinted at in the film, the existence or presence of Light was an extinction-level threat to the
DrowNight Elves who had existed in Darkness long before the light came around. Destroying the universe was a matter of “survival” for the elves, although how specifically Light is harmful is not explained. So the overarching conflict would have been between two kings almost identical in their aims: destruction of another race in order to save their own. This opens up so many more interesting and advanced character development and plotlines that would have made for a more enjoyable and thought provoking movie.PS. Unless they hid things about Loki’s powers, the “twist” ending is complete bull. There’s just no way it works.
Unfortunately it assumes you are familiar with Nordic mythology and skips the oppurtunity to delve into why Svartelves need to live in darkness or what the aether is. It is definitely a movie with a narrow appeal that was marketed to a wide audience. I loved it but I can see how, in terms of telling an accessible story, it failed. If the villains motivations require an explanation from fans of the books then the writers haven’t translated the story well. I had the same problem with the Krull invasion in Avengers. Why, aside from We Like Shooting Stuff, do they want to attack Earth? Why does Hulk leave halfway through and come back totall in control?
I don’t like Marvel’s Thor at all. The mythological Thor is an awesomely interesting character, with a ton of ancient lore surrounding him. Marvel could have mined that literature heavily and made a truly epic hero, but instead made this cartoon caricature that barely resembles his namesake. If they wanted just another dumb superhero, they should have gone with that. Instead, they used the name of a great figure from mythology, and ignored most of the mythology.