The Upcoming Thor Movie

So the new Thor movie has been announced. Natalie Portman is playing Thor. Seriously, what the fuck?

First we get a female 007 and now Thor is played by a female. I am far from sexist but this is just wrong. Next thing we will see a transgender Wonder Woman.


So the movies will be following the changes to the comic.

I think it is Jane Foster that’s deemed worthy of wielding the hammer when that comic was originally published.

I’ve read that the new phase of the MCU will be focused on the women comic characters. Black Widow will be in her own movie; still played by Scarlet Johansen. Don’t know if it will be a prequel or multi-verse plot line though.

If the MCU is going to focus on female characters now, I hope they bring Rouge back into the story lines as a way to get X-Men into the MCU. Her early titles where she’s cruising the Australian Outback on a motorcycle could make for a nice movie.

And, as much as I like Anna Paquin, Rouge needs red hair and a Mississippi drawl.

1 Like

A Thoress? That is stupid.

lol, good one in there @s7l

Its unoriginal story writing, they cant create a new character as they dont have the talent so they just plagiarize an established character. They are running out of original stories so just going back and forth with old ones. I like how the writer compares it to be ok for women to be in the same category as frogs and horse faced aliens, lmfao.

1 Like

So f@#ing true @s7l

1 Like


A (black) female is taking Bond’s number at MI6 but not the rôle of Bond himself so it’s not too terrible. And Phoebe Waller-Bridge is writing the screenplay so I reckon it’s going to be awesome, she is a fantastically talented writer.

Just Thor, whoever is worthy of wielding the hammer gets the name.

But you’re right, pretty unoriginal since there are any number of Norse goddesses they could have introduced as a new character.

Thor was never the Hammer, the two were synonomous with eachother though. Thor was Son of Odin, bearer of the lightning and thunder. Not a women nor a frog or an alien horse headed creature. I dont give much credit to marvel stories, i think they muddy the waters on the old myths an legends to suit hollywood.

1 Like

But it still gets back to @s7l comment of appropriating an existing character - especially one as established as James Bond. They could have introduced her as 005 and given her a more substantial or pivotal role like Michelle Yeoh’s in Tomorrow Never Dies before spinning her off into her own franchise.

1 Like

Yeah but then we wouldn’t be talking about the film here and providing free publicity :slight_smile:


Sure we would; be talking about the new 005 franchise.

Just like talking about Natalie Portman playing Thor. :monkey_face:

1 Like

I like Natalie Portman, i think she is a great actor but not suited to being Thor.

Neither is a black women playing 007. The 007 movies have always been males, what is wrong with that?


They’re not “007” movies, they’re James Bond movies and the lead character in the next Bond movie will be played by a bloke.

Pretty much it on my end also @Head_on_a_Stick .

They are James Bond 007 movies. If the lead actor of the next Bond 007 movies is not actually James Bond then the writers and producers need to take a good long look in the mirror.

The lead actor of the next Bond movie will be James Bond but he’s lost his MI6 code number, presumably to generate click-bait headlines for promotional purposes.

I dont know, i dont follow the bond movies. News articles are saying that the new 007 which has always been technically James Bond is now going to be a black women named Lashana Lynch. Too many white males in movie roles i suppose, seems like hollywood is playing race/gender wars at the theater. I mean i dont expect snoopy or poo bear to all of a sudden change genders after so many years, that would be silly dont you agree?

1 Like

Does Pooh Bear shit in the woods? :grin:

But seriously, the only thing that really matters is whether the film is any good, IMO.

1 Like