The verdict is in: Taika Waititi, the genius behind Thor: Ragnarök, let us down with Thor: Love and Thunder. What happened? Where did the magic go? It’s the story of a missing creative spark, a lack of that unique charm that made Ragnarök such a breakout success. The thing about storytelling is that when you’re rushing to meet a deadline, you can lose the very essence that makes your work resonate with audiences. Unfortunately, that’s what happened here.
Let’s be clear: Thor is a beloved character. He’s a god, sure, but he’s also deeply relatable. We've watched him grow from arrogant warrior to humble hero, and along the way, humor became the perfect seasoning for his complex character arc. That’s why Thor: Ragnarök worked so well—it balanced his strength with vulnerability, humor with gravity. The sequel, however, feels like it’s missing that balance. The character development that made Thor compelling in the first place is lost in favor of flashy spectacle and an over-the-top comedic tone that doesn’t serve the character or the story. Thor deserved more than a punchline. He deserved a journey that was meaningful, not just a vehicle for jokes.
But it’s not just Thor that suffers. Loki was the real standout of the Thor series. In the first film, Loki’s motivations were clear, his relationship with Odin was rich with nuance, and we saw his vulnerability beneath his villainy. His arc felt earned. Then came Ragnarök, where Loki’s character—while still fun—lost some of that depth. Still, it was clear he was more than just a one-dimensional antagonist. But in Love and Thunder, the depth that made Loki so compelling was completely absent in Hela. Hela’s motivations were flimsy, her backstory barely explored. She felt more like a plot device than a real character. And that’s a shame, because Loki set such a high bar.
The real problem, though, is that Thor: Love and Thunder lacked vision. It felt more like a cash grab than a continuation of a meaningful story. There’s nothing wrong with making a movie that appeals to a wide audience, but when the focus shifts entirely to commercial success, you risk losing the heart of the narrative. The stakes feel shallow, and the character arcs lose their weight. Instead of building on Thor’s journey, the movie seems to prioritize spectacle over substance, and the result is a film that doesn’t move the character forward—it just goes through the motions.
Natalie Portman’s return as Jane Foster is another casualty of this lack of direction. She’s fine, I suppose, but the romance between her and Thor feels tired and cliché, almost as if it were ripped from the pages of a 60’s comic book. It didn’t have the emotional depth it needed to make us care about her character. It was all too convenient, and without a clear narrative purpose, her presence felt more like a checklist item than a meaningful addition to the story.
Then there’s the CGI. Oh, the CGI. Yes, the visuals were stunning, but here’s the thing: CGI can’t mask a weak story. The reliance on special effects became a crutch, distracting from the lack of genuine character development. Action scenes were flashy but hollow. There was no emotional weight to them, no real stakes. They were just shiny, empty moments designed to keep you entertained but never truly invested.
Thor: Love and Thunder had all the ingredients to be great. It had the star power, the humor, the spectacle, and a beloved character at its center. But instead of being a meaningful continuation of Thor’s journey, it became a hollow imitation of the greatness that came before it. It was a film that tried to be everything—funny, action-packed, heartfelt—but in the end, it was none of those things in a satisfying way.
The result? A movie that’s fun in the moment but leaves you feeling empty afterward. Waititi had the opportunity to make Thor into something even more epic, but instead, he let us down. The spark was there, but it was extinguished by an overreliance on spectacle and a lack of true vision for the character. And that, in the end, is what hurts the most: the feeling that it could have been so much more.
Comentários