Rules: explain why
Ready player one.
That has to be one of the cringiest movies I’ve seen, is tries so hard, too hard with it’s “WE LOVE YOU NERD, YOU’RE SO COOL FOR PLAYING GAMES AND GETTING THIS 80S REFERENCE” message and the whole “corporation bad, the people good” narrative seems written for toddlers… The fan service feels cheap and adds nothing to the story.
Finally, they trying to make the people believe that very attractive girl with a barely visible red tint spot on her face is “ugly”… Like wtf?
Yet it received decent reviews plus being one of the most successful movies of that year.
Ragnarok was good though? Entertaining and overall engaging. The original was a snooze fest, dark world is AWFUL and ugly looking. The last one is as bad only with bad jokes and unfinished CGI
While I still just fundamentally disagree with your assessment that “Ragnarok was good though”, what’s definitely true is that calling Ragnarok good is utterly irrelevant in response to this specific comment.
Because this isn’t about Ragnarok. It’s about the notion that comic book adaptations can be taken seriously at all.
How is that any different than Ragnarok?
Most of the jokes landed in Ragnarok and you don’t see Thor jumping like an idiot, he actually has badass moments
Some of the jokes land, “most” is debatable. The few badass and dramatic moments are ruined by being immediately followed by some slapstick bullshit.