Ah nuts. Oh well, maybe Thanos will show up?
“Real” science, supposedly. 
In the case of Thor, I liked how he had a job, had a nervous breakdown when he realized he was a god, and spent several years in an asylum.
THOR TUTORIAL REQUEST
Not a comic book guy, but I often like comic book movies and am really impressed with the scope of this project.
I really know nothing about Thor. I keep seeing the Thor-savvy Dopers making a “Deity doesn’t mix with Science” argument, but I haven’t see anyone address a Thor quote I’ve seen around various sites, so I’ll post it here in hopes one of you more knowledgeable on the topic will give me your take on it:
I don’t know anything about any of the comic book versions of Thor- so, I don’t understand any of the above Quote.
Can anyone shed some light . . . then share an opinion???
… i’m not sure what your question is exactly… The quote is saying “We are not making a movie about the Thor from Norse mythology. We are making a movie about the super hero Thor from the comics. If we were making a movie about Norse mythology things would be different, the gods would actually be gods… but we’re making a movie where the Asgardians are other dimensional beings… their science will look like magic, but they aren’t magical or actual gods.”
Wikipedia generally has good summaries of entire histories of characters.
In general, nearly all the Marvel superheros have a “golden age” where a particular writer or artist/writer team mesh perfectly with a particular hero, and the story is remembered fondly by fans.
Lee/Kirby was one such period for Thor. Pretty much anything Kirby touched is remembered fondly by fans, regardless of the quality of the stories. In this period, Lee was still in his “monsteronotopea” phase where he would put together some random sounds and imagine what kind of monster would fit that name. Every month, Thor would fight some weird blobby thing that his brother Loki would create.
The Len Wein era (1970’s) is noted for developing the Norse mythological elements, and adding the “Norse Stooges” of Frandal, Hogunn, and Volstagg.
The Simonson era is considered Thor’s “golden age.” Of particular note is the alien Beta Ray Bill, the only other person in the universe who is capable of wielding Mjolnir. Of what I can recall, the series is critically acclaimed because of the A and B stories: stripped of mjolnir, Thor had to endure a series of trials that developed his character, while on Earth, Beta Ray Bill learns about human values and foibles while acting as the replacement Thor, kind of like Samurai Jack in reverse.
The Ultimate Thor is completely different, and his character development is more like Jesus than the Marvel Thor.
My theory, by Miss Anne Elk,
I mean, my theory about super hero movies is that their goodness is proportional to the number of villains. Two villains make a movie half as good. Three make it a third as good. Four (Batman & Robin) make it a fourth as good.
It’s hard to imagine that six heroes would be anything other than one-sixth as good. Was there ever an ending to an Avengers comic with all the heroes battling the villain as a group that worked either as words or pictures?
And if there are more than one villain… :smack:
Spiderman 2 is considered the best of the series, with 2 villains (3 counting the ghost of Goblin 1), and Superman 2 had 4 of the best villains ever.
X-men worked as an ensemble, but yes other examples are very rare.
From what little I remember of reading the Avengers back in the day (early 80s) the problem the movie wil likely face is the same one they had in most of thier books - infighting, team changes, hell, even the same char deciding to be a different hero some issues - so, the first one will likely be just that - their stories coming together into the team for a common good - best part is they wont have to intoduce the chars backstories themselves , they’ve already got that set up.
Me, I’m still hoping for the Scarlett Witch to be among them -
And both of the recent Batman movies (widely considered to be the best treatments Bats has received on screen) featured two villains apiece: Scarecrow and R’as al-Ghul in the first, Two-Face and Joker in the second.
I’ll second that, and add: just keep Joss Whedon away fr… oh, wait. 
I suppose my question (posed to the comic book knowledgeable) is: “Do you buy it?”
The quote addresses concerns that Thor does not fit in the universe set up in the three completed films (Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2).
Not being comic book literate, I don’t know the Asgardians, the Tree of Life, or just what are the examples of “real science we don’t know about”. And reading the Wiki summaries, though helpful, do not provide me with the full context and understanding that a real Marvel fan will have from having submerged him/herself in the original source.
So, since I’ve seen so many express concern that Thor will not mesh with the established realism of these films, I ask, regarding the explanation provided in the quote: Do you buy it?
If you buy this explanation, how do you see Thor fitting in?
How is the version of Thor appropriate to adaptation different from other versions of Thor, versions of Thor that would not fit so well?
If you do not buy this explanation, how is Thor still at odds with the film reality?
As we all agree, we’ve already seen The Definitive Version of Nick Fury.
I don’t. Frankly, I was just fine with Ultimate Thor as-is - as a literal god. To me, the explanation sounds more like a poor attempt to placate any Christians currently thinking, “A god other than Jehovah is real? Heresy!!”
Just saw Iron Man 2. I rest my case. 
You rest your case how?
Iron Man 2 was good because there was only on villain (Ivan Vanko)?
Iron Man 2 was not good because there were two villains (Ivan Vanko and Justin Hammer)?
Has anyone else seen this yet?
You forgot option 3: Iron Man 2 was good because there was only one villain: Tony Stark.
I’m sort of on the fringe of comic book fandom (a lot closer than the vast majority of movie-goers), and if you asked me who The Avengers are, I’d say “Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and the Hulk”. Oh, I know there have been many others, and that the roster has fluctuated a lot and spawned spin-off teams, but the way I see it, those four are the core.
I’m bumping this because rumors are swirling that Ed Norton is NOT being brought back to be Bruce Banner.
Ed Norton squeezed out of The Avengers? Looks That Way!
Thoughts?
I honestly thought he was fine in the last Hulk movie and they should use him for consistency.
I don’t know him personally…but I’ve never seen Ed Norton and not thought he was a giant douchtool.